Short, source-of-truth answers to the questions we are asked most often by health systems, payers, health technology teams, and research organizations. Every answer is written to stand on its own, with no client claims or invented statistics.
A quick, factual summary of who we are and what we do.
Organization
BlockInterop, LLC
Category
Healthcare technology and interoperability consulting
Core standards
FHIR, SMART on FHIR, US Core, HL7 v2, CMS interoperability APIs, TEFCA and QHIN exchange
Clients served
Health systems and providers, health plans and payers, health technology companies, clinical research organizations
Engagement types
Strategy and assessment, architecture, implementation, interface development, testing, go-live and scale support
Area served
United States
Primary next step
Book an interoperability strategy call
Common questions
Answer Cards
Each card gives the direct answer first, then the detail behind it.
What is healthcare interoperability?
Healthcare interoperability is the ability of different health IT systems to exchange data and use it in a shared, meaningful way. In practice it combines data standards such as HL7 v2 and FHIR, secure APIs and network participation, governance and consent rules, and workflow design so the data arrives where a clinician, member service representative, or research coordinator can act on it.
Standards layer: HL7 v2 messaging, FHIR resources and profiles such as US Core, and document exchange.
Transport layer: APIs, interface engines, and network participation such as TEFCA and QHIN connectivity.
Governance layer: identity, consent, exchange purpose, data stewardship, and audit.
Workflow layer: getting the right data into the screen and moment where a decision is made.
HL7 v2 is a message-based standard that pushes events such as admissions, orders, and results between systems over interface engines. FHIR is a resource-based standard that exposes data through RESTful APIs so applications can request exactly what they need. Most organizations run both: HL7 v2 continues to carry high-volume clinical event traffic while FHIR supports apps, partner APIs, and regulatory requirements.
HL7 v2 strengths: mature, event-driven, high throughput, deeply embedded in existing clinical operations.
FHIR strengths: API access, granular queries, app launch through SMART on FHIR, and regulatory alignment.
The decision depends on workflow, latency, partner capability, and who will operate the integration.
Migration is usually incremental, with FHIR added alongside existing v2 interfaces rather than replacing them.
TEFCA, the Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement, is the United States framework that creates a common legal and technical basis for nationwide health information exchange. A QHIN, or Qualified Health Information Network, is a network designated under that framework that connects participants to each other for defined exchange purposes. Organizations join nationwide exchange by participating through a QHIN rather than by negotiating point-to-point agreements with every partner.
Participation involves technical connectivity, legal agreements, and operational support commitments.
Exchange purposes and consent handling shape what data may flow and for what use.
Readiness work covers QHIN selection criteria, onboarding, connectivity testing, and runbooks.
TEFCA participation complements, rather than replaces, existing HL7 and FHIR integrations.
What do CMS interoperability and prior authorization rules require?
CMS interoperability rules require affected payers to expose health data through standards-based FHIR APIs. That generally includes Patient Access, Provider Access, and Payer-to-Payer APIs, plus prior authorization APIs and reporting that make utilization management decisions and status available programmatically. Meeting the rules is an engineering and operations program, not only a compliance exercise, because it depends on data availability, member matching, attribution, and consent.
Map each requirement to a concrete capability, data source, system, and accountable owner.
Confirm data availability and quality before committing to API delivery dates.
Design member matching, attribution, and consent handling explicitly.
Build testing and evidence collection into delivery so compliance reviews are straightforward.
How does an application integrate with Epic or another EHR?
Most modern EHR integrations use SMART on FHIR to launch an application inside the EHR with clinical context and scoped authorization, supported by FHIR reads and writes and, where needed, HL7 v2 interfaces. The technical work is usually the smaller half: the integration must also pass the health system's security and architecture review, fit an existing clinical workflow, and be packaged so it can be deployed again at the next site without a custom build.
Choose the launch pattern, scopes, and context passing that match the clinical workflow.
Decide where FHIR reads, write-back, and HL7 v2 interfaces each belong.
Prepare security, privacy, and architecture review documentation early.
Productize the integration so onboarding a new health system is repeatable.
Clinical research uses healthcare interoperability to move real care data into study operations. FHIR-based access to EHR data supports trial feasibility, candidate identification, pre-screening, and reduced manual chart abstraction, while consent, privacy, and audit controls travel with each data flow. Done well, the same data pathway can be reused across studies and sites instead of being rebuilt per protocol.
Define which clinical data elements actually drive eligibility screening.
Design FHIR access patterns, identity resolution, and matching logic.
Attach consent, minimum necessary, and audit controls to every flow.
Fit candidate identification into existing research and clinical operations.
How long does a healthcare interoperability project take?
Timelines depend on scope, data readiness, partner and vendor dependencies, and review cycles rather than on the standard chosen, so BlockInterop scopes duration during a strategy call instead of quoting a generic figure. A useful pattern is to sequence work into a short discovery and architecture phase, a first production-quality integration, and then repeatable expansion, with review and testing gates identified up front because they frequently drive the critical path.
Discovery and architecture establish scope, dependencies, and sequencing.
The first integration proves the pattern end to end in production conditions.
Expansion reuses that pattern across partners, sites, and platforms.
Security review, testing, and cutover windows should be planned as schedule drivers.
BlockInterop is a healthcare technology and interoperability consulting firm that works with health systems and provider groups, health plans and payers, health technology companies, and clinical research organizations. Engagements cover FHIR and API implementation, HL7 v2 interface development, CMS interoperability and prior authorization, TEFCA and QHIN readiness, Epic and EHR integration, clinical trial data connectivity, interoperability strategy, and testing and implementation support, from strategy through production.
Serves providers, payers, health technology companies, and clinical research organizations.
Delivers strategy, architecture, hands-on implementation, testing, and go-live support.
Works with recognized standards while accounting for legacy system realities.
Primary next step: book an interoperability strategy call.
BlockInterop works with four groups: healthcare providers and health systems modernizing integration without disrupting care delivery, health plans and payers operationalizing CMS requirements and prior authorization APIs, digital health and health technology companies whose sales and deployment cycles depend on integration readiness, and clinical research organizations connecting real-world healthcare data to study operations.
Providers and health systems: interface rationalization, EHR integration, nationwide exchange.
Health plans and payers: CMS APIs, prior authorization, member matching, compliance evidence.
Health technology companies: productized FHIR integration and enterprise review readiness.
Clinical research organizations: patient-to-trial data workflows and site enablement.
Start by naming the business outcome, then work backward to the data, systems, and standards required to reach it. A focused assessment of current interfaces, data availability, regulatory obligations, and organizational ownership usually produces a clearer roadmap than beginning with a technology selection. BlockInterop's entry point is an interoperability strategy call to identify priorities, risks, dependencies, and the most practical next steps.
Define the outcome and the decision the data needs to support.
Inventory current interfaces, APIs, vendors, and data gaps.
Confirm regulatory obligations and their real deadlines.
Assign ownership for build, operations, and monitoring before you build.
Evaluate your organization’s readiness across FHIR, HL7, CMS requirements, TEFCA participation, governance, workflow integration, testing, and scalability.
FHIR and API foundations
HL7 v2 interface inventory
CMS requirement mapping
TEFCA participation posture
Data governance and consent
Workflow integration
Testing and validation
Scalability and support model
Ready to Move Interoperability Forward?
Whether you are preparing for new CMS requirements, modernizing healthcare integrations, connecting to a QHIN, or building a FHIR-enabled product, BlockInterop can help you define the right path and execute it.
