Australian FHIR vs US FHIR: Key Differences at the Implementation Guide Level
Australian FHIR vs US FHIR: What Changes, and Why - First Line Software
Summary
This article compares the technical differences between Australian (AU) and US FHIR implementations. While both use FHIR R4 as the base standard, significant variations exist at the Implementation Guide (IG) layer and in required data elements, indicating that simple configuration changes are insufficient.
Details
According to the text, both Australia and the US utilize FHIR R4 from HL7, meaning the core resource structure (e.g., Patient) is identical. However, major differences emerge at the Implementation Guide (IG) layer. The US uses US Core, while Australia uses AU Base and AU Core. These IG differences affect key areas such as patient identifiers (AU uses IHI nationally, replacing US MRN), medication coding systems (AU uses AMT instead of RxNorm), and required data elements (USCDI vs AUCDI). Crucially, the text emphasizes that these are not mere configuration changes but require deliberate overrides and code-level modifications for each resource. Furthermore, specific Australian extensions (e.g., Indigenous Status) necessitate custom Data Transformation Language (DTL) mapping, demonstrating a broad scope of technical adaptation.
Original content copyright by respective publishers