Skip to content
BlockInterop

Service

Clinical Trial Interoperability

Research teams need healthcare data in a usable shape. We connect care and research systems with standards-based, auditable workflows.

What we deliver

  • Patient-to-trial data workflow design
  • EHR-to-research data extraction and mapping
  • Eligibility and pre-screening data models
  • Consent, privacy, and audit considerations
  • Site enablement and study operations support

Outcomes you can expect

Better identification of potentially eligible participants
Less manual chart abstraction for study teams
Repeatable data workflows across studies and sites

Case study placeholder

Add a client case study here describing the environment, scope, approach, and measured results for a clinical trial interoperability engagement.

Answers

Questions We Get About This Work

Direct answers, written to stand on their own.

How is interoperability used in clinical trials?

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.

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.

What is the difference between FHIR and HL7 v2?

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.

Not Sure Where to Start?

Schedule a focused conversation to identify your interoperability priorities, risks, dependencies, and most practical next steps.

Talk With an Interoperability Expert

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.

Tell us about your organization, current challenge, timeline, and desired outcome.