Abstract
Modern surgical departments are characterized by a high degree of automation supporting complex procedures. It recently became apparent that integrated operating rooms can improve the quality of care, simplify clinical workflows, and mitigate equipment-related incidents and human errors. Particularly using computer assistance based on data from integrated surgical devices is a promising opportunity. However, the lack of manufacturer-independent interoperability often prevents the deployment of collaborative assistive systems. The German flagship project OR.NET has therefore developed, implemented, validated, and standardized concepts for open medical device interoperability. This paper describes the universal OR.NET interoperability concept enabling a safe and dynamic manufacturer-independent interconnection of point-of-care (PoC) medical devices in the operating room and the whole clinic. It is based on a protocol specifically addressing the requirements of device-to-device communication, yet also provides solutions for connecting the clinical information technology (IT) infrastructure. We present the concept of a service-oriented medical device architecture (SOMDA) as well as an introduction to the technical specification implementing the SOMDA paradigm, currently being standardized within the IEEE 11073 service-oriented device connectivity (SDC) series. In addition, the Session concept is introduced as a key enabler for safe device interconnection in highly dynamic ensembles of networked medical devices; and finally, some security aspects of a SOMDA are discussed.
Research funding: This work has been partially funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) as part of the OR.NET project. Grand numbers: 16KT1235, 16KT1236, 16KT1238, 16KT1239.
References
[1] Andersen B, Kasparick M, Golatowski F, Ingenerf J. Extending the IEEE 11073-1010X nomenclature for the modelling of surgical devices. In: 2016 IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics (BHI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, Feb 2016: 244–247 [Online]. Available: dx.doi.org/10.1109/BHI.2016.7455880.10.1109/BHI.2016.7455880Search in Google Scholar
[2] Andersen B, Kasparick M, Ulrich H, et al. Connecting the clinical IT infrastructure to a service-oriented architecture of medical devices. Biomed Eng-Biomed Tech 2018; 63: 57–68.10.1515/bmt-2017-0021Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[3] ASTM International (American Society for Testing and Materials). ASTM F2761-09(2013), Medical Devices and Medical Systems – essential safety requirements for equipment comprising the patient-centric integrated clinical environment (ICE) – part 1: general requirements and conceptual model. West Conshohocken, PA.Search in Google Scholar
[4] Benzko J, Krause L, Janß A, et al. Modular user interface design for integrated surgical workplaces. Biomed Eng/Biomed Tech 2016; 61: 183–197.10.1515/bmt-2014-0125Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[5] Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Roth EM, et al. A prospective study of patient safety in the operating room. Surgery 2006; 139: 159–173.10.1016/j.surg.2005.07.037Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[6] Cleary K, Kinsella A, Mun SK. OR 2020 workshop report: operating room of the future. Int Congr Ser 2005; 1281: 832–838.10.1016/j.ics.2005.03.279Search in Google Scholar
[7] de Deugd S, Carroll R, Kelly KE, Millett B, Ricker J. SODA: Service Oriented Device Architecture. Pervas Comput IEEE 2006; 5: 94–96.10.1109/MPRV.2006.59Search in Google Scholar
[8] Dell’Anna J, Janß A, Clusmann H, Radermacher K. A configurable footswitch unit for the open networked neurosurgical OR – development, evaluation and future perspectives. i-com 2016; 15: 227.10.1515/icom-2016-0031Search in Google Scholar
[9] Dell’Anna J, Janß A, Zeissig E-M, Ganser K, Radermacher K, Clusmann H. Development of new concepts for safe and usable human-machine-interfaces in the open networked neurosurgical OR. In: 67th Annual Meeting of the German Society of Neurosurgery (DGNC), Frankfurt am Main, 2016 [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/16dgnc357.Search in Google Scholar
[10] DOOP-Projekt (Dienst-orientierte OP-Integration). 16.01.2017. [Online]. Available: http://www.doop-projekt.de/.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Erl T. Service-oriented architecture: concepts, technology, and design. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall PTR 2005.Search in Google Scholar
[12] Erl T. SOA – principles of service design. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall PTR 2007.Search in Google Scholar
[13] Gessat M, Bohn S, Vorunganti A, Franke S, Burgert O. TiCoLi: an open software infrastructure for device integration in the digital OR. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2011; 6: 284.Search in Google Scholar
[14] Guédon A, Wauben L, Overvelde M, et al. Safety status system for operating room devices. Technol Health Care 2014; 22: 795–803.10.3233/THC-140854Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[15] Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS). HIMSS Dictionary of Healthcare Information Technology Terms, Acronyms and Organizations, Third Edition. 2013, p. 75.Search in Google Scholar
[16] Health Level Seven International (HL7). HL7 FHIR [Online]. Available: www.hl7.org/fhir/.Search in Google Scholar
[17] Hu Y-Y, Arriaga AF, Roth EM, et al. Protecting patients from an unsafe system: the etiology & recovery of intra-operative deviations in care. Ann Surg 2012; 256: 203–210.10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182602564Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[18] Ibach B, Benzko J, Radermacher K. OR-integration based on SOA – automatic detection of new Service Providers using DPWS. In: Lemke HU, editor. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg, vol. 1, CARS. Geneva (Switzerland): Springer, 2010: 195–196.Search in Google Scholar
[19] iData Research. US Market for Video, High-Tech and Integrated & Hybrid Operating Theatre Equipment. Tech. Rep. 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.idataresearch.com/product/us-video-high-tech-and-integrated-operating-theatre-equipment-market-2016-forecasted-to-2022-medsuite/.Search in Google Scholar
[20] IEEE Standards Association. ISO/IEEE Health Informatics – point-of-care medical device communication – part 10101: nomenclature. ISO/IEEE 11073-10101:2004(E), 2004, pp. 1–492.Search in Google Scholar
[21] IEEE Standards Association. Standard for ISO/IEEE Health Informatics – Point-of-care medical device communication – part 10201: domain information model. ISO/IEEE 11073-10201:2004(E), 2005, pp. 1–183.Search in Google Scholar
[22] IEEE Standards Association. IEEE 11073-10207-2017 – IEEE Approved Draft Standard for Domain Information & Service Model for Service-Oriented Point-of-Care Medical Device Communication. 2017. [Online]. Available: https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/11073-10207-2017.html.Search in Google Scholar
[23] IEEE Standards Association. IEEE Project P11073-20701 – Standard for Service-Oriented Medical Device Exchange Architecture & Protocol Binding [Online]. Available: http://standards.ieee.org/develop/project/11073-20701.html.Search in Google Scholar
[24] IEEE Standards Association. Health informatics–point-of-care medical device communication Part 20702: Medical Devices Communication Profile for Web Services. In: IEEE Std 11073-20702-2016, 2016, pp. 1–49.Search in Google Scholar
[25] Janß A, Plogmann S, Radermacher K. Human-centered risk management for medical devices – new methods and tools. Biomed Eng/Biomed Tech 2016; 61: 165–181.10.1515/bmt-2014-0124Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Janß A, Thorn J, Schmitz M, et al. Extended device profiles and testing procedures for the approval process of integrated medical devices using the IEEE 11073 communication standard. Biomed Eng-Biomed Tech 2018; 63: 95–103.10.1515/bmt-2017-0055Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[27] Kasparick M, Andersen B. Offene Standards im vernetzten Operationssaal. Elektron Praxis 2016; 14: 62–64.Search in Google Scholar
[28] Kasparick M, Golatowski F, Timmermann D. Cyber-physische Systeme im OP-Saal – Ein Machbarkeitsnachweis. In: INFORMATIK 2014 Big Data – Komplexität meistern 44. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), Stuttgart, Germany, Sep 2014: 1203–1214.Search in Google Scholar
[29] Kasparick M, Rockstroh M, Schlichting S, Golatowski F, Timmermann D. Mechanism for safe remote activation of networked surgical and PoC devices using dynamic assignable controls. In: 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC). IEEE, Orlando, FL, USA, Aug 2016: 2390–2394. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7591211/.10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591211Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[30] Kasparick M, Schlichting S, Golatowski F, Timmermann D. New IEEE 11073 standards for interoperable, networked point-of-care Medical Devices. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, Milan, Italy, Aug 2015, pp. 1721–1724.10.1109/EMBC.2015.7318709Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[31] Kasparick M, Schlichting S, Golatowski F, Timmermann D. Medical DPWS: new IEEE 11073 standard for safe and interoperable medical device communication. In: Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN), 2015 IEEE Conference on, Tokyo, Japan, Oct 2015, pp. 212–217.10.1109/CSCN.2015.7390446Search in Google Scholar
[32] Kasparick M, Schmitz M, Golatowski F, Timmermann D. Dynamic remote control through service orchestration of point-of-care and surgical devices based on IEEE 11073 SDC. In: 2016 IEEE Healthcare Innovation Point-Of-Care Technologies Conference (HI-POCT). Cancun: IEEE, Nov 2016: 121–125. [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7797712/.10.1109/HIC.2016.7797712Search in Google Scholar
[33] Knipp P, Janß A. Regulatory approval route and strategy for open networked medical devices. In: 49. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Biomedizinische Technik (DGBMT), BMT 2015, Lübeck, 2015.Search in Google Scholar
[34] Koeny M, Benzko J, Czaplik M, et al. The smart operating room: smartOR. In: Memon QA, editor. Distributed networks – intelligence, security, and applications. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press – Taylor & Francis Group 2013: 291–315.10.1201/b15282-12Search in Google Scholar
[35] Lemke HU, Vannier MW. The operating room and the need for an IT infrastructure and standards. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2006; 1: 117–121.10.1007/s11548-006-0051-7Search in Google Scholar
[36] Lesh K, Weininger S, Goldman JM, Wilson B, Himes G. Medical device interoperability-assessing the environment. In: 2007 joint workshop on High Confidence Medical Devices, Software, and Systems and Medical Device Plug-and-Play Interoperability (HCMDSS-MDPnP 2007). IEEE, Jun 2007: 3–12. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HCMDSS-MDPnP.2007.22; http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4438159/.Search in Google Scholar
[37] Mauro C, Sunyaev A, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H. Standardized device services – a design pattern for service oriented integration of medical devices. In: 2010 43rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Honolulu, HI, USA, Jan 2010, pp. 1–10.10.1109/HICSS.2010.347Search in Google Scholar
[38] MD PnP Program. Medical Device “Plug-and-Play” Interoperability Program. 2015-03-14. [Online]. Available: www.mdpnp.org/.Search in Google Scholar
[39] MD PnP Program. OpenICE [Online]. Available: www.openice.info.Search in Google Scholar
[40] Melzer I. Service-orientierte Architekturen mit Web Services: Konzepte – Standards – Praxis, 4th ed. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 2010.10.1007/978-3-8274-2550-8Search in Google Scholar
[41] National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS). Report on Uniform Data Standards for Patient Medical Record Information. 2000, pp. 21–22.Search in Google Scholar
[42] OASIS. UDDI Version 3.0.2 – OASIS Technical Specification. 2004 [Online]. Available: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/uddi-spec/doc/spec/v3/uddi-v3.0.2-20041019.htm.Search in Google Scholar
[43] OASIS. Reference model for Service Oriented Architecture 1.0 – OASIS Standard. 2006 [Online]. Available: http://docs.oasis-open.org/soa-rm/v1.0/.Search in Google Scholar
[44] OASIS. Devices Profile for Web Services Version 1.1 - OASIS Standard. 2009 [Online]. Available: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/dpws/1.1/os/wsdd-dpws-1.1-spec-os.html.Search in Google Scholar
[45] OASIS. Web Services Dynamic Discovery (WS-Discovery) Version 1.1. 2009 [Online]. Available: http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-dd/discovery/1.1/os/wsdd-discovery-1.1-spec-os.html.Search in Google Scholar
[46] Object Management Group. Data Distribution Service (DDS) Specification [Online]. Available: http://www.omg.org/spec/#DDS.Search in Google Scholar
[47] Okamoto J, Masamune K, Iseki H, Muragaki Y. Development of a next-generation operating room “Smart Cyber Operating Theater (SCOT)” – development concept and project summay. In: Proceedings of CARS 2015: International Conference and Exhibition on Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, Barcelona, Spain, 2015: 156–158.Search in Google Scholar
[48] “OR.NET – Flagship project funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research,” www.ornet.org (retrieved May 20th, 2016).Search in Google Scholar
[49] Pfeiffer JH, Dingler ME, Dietz C, Lueth TC. Requirements and architecture design for open real-time communication in the operating room. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). IEEE, Zhuhai, China, Dec 2015: 458–463 [Online]. Available: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7418810/.10.1109/ROBIO.2015.7418810Search in Google Scholar
[50] Pfeiffer JH, Kasparick M, Strathen B, et al. OR.NET RT: how service-oriented medical device architecture meets real-time communication. Biomed Eng-Biomed Tech 2018; 63: 81–93.10.1515/bmt-2017-0016Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[51] Rockstroh M, Franke S, Dees R, et al. From SOMDA to application – integration strategies in the OR.NET demonstration sites. Biomed Eng-Biomed Tech 2018; 63: 69–80.10.1515/bmt-2017-0023Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[52] Rockstroh M, Franke S, Hofer M, et al. OR.NET: multi-perspective qualitative evaluation of an integrated operating room based on IEEE 11073 SDC. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2017; 12: 1461–1469.10.1007/s11548-017-1589-2Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[53] Schlamelcher J, Onken M, Eichelberg M, Hein A. Dynamic DICOM configuration in a Service-Oriented Medical Device Architecture. In: 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Milan, Italy, Aug 2015: 1717–1720.10.1109/EMBC.2015.7318708Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[54] Schlichting S, Pöhlsen S. An architecture for distributed systems of medical devices in high acuity environments – a proposal for standards adoption. In: HL7, 2014. 11073/HL7 Standards Week, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 2014 [Online]. Available: www.hl7.org/documentcenter/public/wg/healthcaredevices/20140116 An architecture for distributed systems of medical devices in high-acuity environments.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
[55] “sourceforge: OpenSDC facilitates development of distributed systems of medical devices.” [Online]. Available: https://sourceforge.net/projects/opensdc/.Search in Google Scholar
[56] SurgiTAIX AG. Open Surgical Communication Library (OSCLib) [Online]. Available: https://github.com/surgitaix/osclib.Search in Google Scholar
[57] SurgiTAIX AG. “Software for the Integrated Clinical Environment (SoftICE)” [Online]. Available: https://bitbucket.org/surgitaix/softice.Search in Google Scholar
[58] TeKoMed – Technologische Kompatibilität in der Medizintechnik durch serviceorientierte Architekturen. 2017-01-17 [Online]. Available: http://kosse-sh.de/projekte/tekomed/.Search in Google Scholar
[59] W3C Working Group Note. Web Services Glossary. 2004 [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/NOTE-ws-gloss-20040211/.Search in Google Scholar
[60] Weerakkody RA, Cheshire NJ, Riga C, et al. Surgical technology and operating-room safety failures: a systematic review of quantitative studies. BMJ Qual Saf 2013; 22: 710–718.10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001778Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[61] Will A, Pahontu R, Bergh B. Vernetzte Medizintechnik im Krankenhaus: Vernetzung von Medizingeräten und weiteren IT-Komponenten. KU Gesundheitsmanagement 2015: 54–56.Search in Google Scholar
[62] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Web Services Description Language (WSDL) 1.1 – W3C Note. 2001 [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/NOTE-wsdl-20010315.Search in Google Scholar
[63] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). SOAP Version 1.2 Part 1: messaging framework (Second Edition) – W3C recommendation. 2007 [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-soap12-part1-20070427/.Search in Google Scholar
[64] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Web Services Policy (WS-Policy) 1.5 – Framework – W3C Recommendation. 2007 [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-ws-policy-20070904/.Search in Google Scholar
[65] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Web Services Description Language (WSDL) Version 2.0 part 1: core language – W3C recommendation. 2007 [Online]. Available: https://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-wsdl20-20070626/.Search in Google Scholar
[66] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Efficient XML Interchange (EXI) Format 1.0 (Second Edition) – W3C Recommendation. 2014 [Online]. Available: http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-exi-20140211/.Search in Google Scholar
[67] Wubben I, van Manen JG, van den Akker BJ, Vaartjes SR, van Harten WH. Equipment-related incidents in the operating room: an analysis of occurrence, underlying causes and consequences for the clinical process. BMJ Qual Saf 2010; 19: e64.10.1136/qshc.2009.037515Search in Google Scholar PubMed
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
