Health Level 7 (HL7) is a set of standards that enable the exchange of healthcare data between different systems. Over the years, HL7 has evolved from version 2 (HL7 v2) to version 3 (HL7 v3), with each iteration aiming to improve interoperability and data standardization. However, the adoption of these versions has varied significantly across the industry.
HL7 v2: The Legacy Standard
Overview
HL7 v2, introduced in 1989, is the most widely used healthcare messaging standard globally. It was designed for real-time data exchange between hospital systems such as electronic health records (EHRs), laboratory information systems (LIS), and radiology information systems (RIS).
Key Characteristics
- Message-Based: Uses pipe (|) and caret (^) delimited text messages.
- Flexible & Customizable: Allows vendors and healthcare providers to create custom implementations.
- Lightweight & Efficient: Simple and easy to implement for many hospital IT teams.
Challenges
- Lack of Standardization: High flexibility leads to interoperability issues between vendors.
- Difficult to Scale: Not optimized for modern API-based applications.
- Limited Semantic Meaning: Harder to interpret complex clinical data compared to newer standards.
Common Use Cases
- ADT (Admission, Discharge, Transfer) messages.
- Lab and imaging result exchange.
- Pharmacy orders and medication updates.
HL7 v3: The Attempt at a More Structured Approach
Overview
HL7 v3, introduced in 2005, was designed to overcome HL7 v2’s lack of standardization by providing a more structured, model-driven approach based on XML. It introduced the Reference Information Model (RIM) to ensure data consistency.
Key Characteristics
- Model-Based: Uses a defined Reference Information Model (RIM) for structured data exchange.
- XML Format: Moves away from delimited text messages to a more structured XML representation.
- Increased Standardization: Reduces variability between implementations.
Challenges
- Complex & Rigid: Harder to implement and adapt to real-world hospital workflows.
- Low Adoption Rate: Many healthcare organizations preferred HL7 v2 due to its simplicity.
- High Implementation Costs: Required significant re-engineering of existing systems.
Common Use Cases
- Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) for structured reports
- Some government-mandated healthcare interoperability projects
- HL7 v3-based applications in highly structured environments
Why HL7 v2 Still Dominates
Despite HL7 v3's structured approach, most healthcare organizations continue using HL7 v2 due to:
- Lower implementation complexity
- Existing investments in HL7 v2 infrastructure
- Better real-world adaptability and customization
FHIR: The Next Evolution
Since both HL7 v2 and v3 have limitations, HL7 developed FHIR (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources) to address modern healthcare interoperability needs. FHIR combines the best of HL7 v2 (simplicity) and HL7 v3 (structured data) while using web-friendly RESTful APIs, making it the preferred standard for modern healthcare applications.
Conclusion
While HL7 v2 remains the dominant standard for legacy systems, FHIR is the future of healthcare interoperability. Organizations still using HL7 v2 or struggling with HL7 v3 adoption should consider FHIR as a long-term strategy to improve healthcare data exchange.
ITR – A trusted tech hub in MedTech and Digital Health
.jpg)
