Interoperability software system

What is Interoperability Testing in Software Testing? STC Admin September 11, The following are the risks associated with Interoperability testing. Unreliable performance : The devices are required to be performing reliably not only with the devices of the same family but also with other devices in terms of data exchange, communication, and data processing. Incorrect operation: The data exchanges between compatible devices should be readable in the same way on all devices.

Also, data processing should be compatible between the source and destination devices or software systems. Loss of data: During data exchange between software systems and devices there should not be any data loss. If source system has sent 1 MB of data then the destination system should receive that 1 MB of data without any single byte loss. Low maintainability: The maintenance of the software systems or devices should be as low as possible against data transfer failure.

Unreliable operation: The operation of software systems as well as devices should be reliable in terms of communication and data exchange. There should not be the case that the data has transferred successfully from the source system but the destination system is facing difficulties in reading that piece of data. Different Types of Software Interoperability Testing The following are the different types of software interoperability testing. Purpose of Interoperability Testing The following are the main purposes of conducting Interoperability testing.

Interoperability Testing Process Follow below process step by step for Interoperability testing: 1. Interoperability Testing Challenges The following are the interoperability testing challenges.

The complexity of the network. Testing scalability. Conformance vs Interoperability Testing The Conformance testing refers to the testing of product compliance against required specifications and standards. Conclusion In this article, we discussed interoperability testing types, the purpose of this testing, test plans, test strategy, interoperability testing challenges and how this testing differs from conformance testing in the real world.

Sign up just providing your email address below: Enter your email address: Check email in your inbox for confirmation to get latest updates Software Testing for free. Happy Testing!!! Related posts:. Share This Post. Share on facebook. Share on linkedin. Programs should focus on selecting a format and level of detail for any architectural description that meets the needs of users. In the case of legacy systems, the Program Manager should adopt a phased approach to re-architecting for modularity or micro-services, over an appropriate timeframe.

While a micro-service approach may be well suited to a DevSecOps infrastructure, it will not be appropriate for all systems. However, maintaining a focus on improving modularity over time is a general good practice.

By the time the program has entered the execution phase and developed its MVP, it should be able to produce an architectural analysis that demonstrates the architecture will support delivery of capability with appropriate cadence going forward.

The MVP is the first major delivery of system capability and will serve as the basis for future work, so it is important to ensure that the program has a well-thought-out approach to its architecture by this time and is implementing software in accordance with the architectural approach.

The architecture may change over time as the system evolves and the capabilities needed are better understood. Programs need not have anticipated all of the most appropriate answers to architectural questions at this time, but should have a rationale for defending decisions made to date and have completed enough of an architecture and design to guide and act as an appropriate constraint and support the start of development.

In Agile this is referred to as an architectural runway. As the architecture and design emerge the architect must continue to make defensible trade-offs that support quality attributes. Throughout the execution phase, the Program Manager should have an approach to continuous monitoring of architecture quality in order to promote continuous improvement, which provides evidence that the system architecture meets at least minimum thresholds for architectural characteristics such as modularity and complexity.

Programs should prefer automated tool scans to ensure that design decisions are made based upon the as-built architecture. Automated tools do not capture all aspects of software development and obviously do not bring human judgment to bear, but they can help programs avoid the worst mistakes and ensure that programs are aware of problematic areas of the software code.

It is important to highlight that the monitoring and analysis should focus on the architecture as it is built in the software in order to provide the government with full cognizance of the current state of the system. This is another reason to use automated tools: automation is necessary to generate a representation of the as-built architecture in a timely fashion that permits monitoring at multiple points over time.

Programs should consider including the results of the continuous monitoring as part of their annual value assessments, to demonstrate that short-term capabilities were not delivered at the expense of longer-term targets. The stakeholders who receive the value assessments will likely not be able to determine whether the program made the appropriate architecture decisions.

However, using these assessments as an opportunity to review architectural quality gives the program an opportunity to make the case that the architecture is sound, and that the developers have not been pushing out rough-and-ready code to deliver short-term capability at the expense of long-term maintainability. Interoperability is the ability of systems, units or forces to provide data, information, materiel, and services to, and accept the same from, other systems, units, or forces and to use the data, information, materiel and services so exchanged to enable them to operate effectively together.

Interoperability includes information exchanges, systems, processes, procedures, organizations, and missions over the life cycle and must be balanced with cybersecurity. IT interoperability includes both the technical exchange of information and the end-to-end operational effectiveness of that exchange of information as required for mission accomplishment.

Interoperability extends beyond information exchange: it includes systems, processes, procedures, organizations, and missions over the lifecycle and must be balanced with cybersecurity. Source DODI It includes topics such as data mapping, distributed objects, and interface definition languages. Wallace points to the composition of the American Health Information Community as a clear signal that HHS believes healthcare is too insular to resolve the issues on its own.

The board of the federal commission, created in late to provide HHS with recommendations on speeding EHR adoption, features numerous business executives from outside healthcare. Healthcare should hear a clear message in this, he says: avoid unnecessary delays and internal disputes and begin making decisions; if not, other people will begin making decisions for you.

Congress, too, is joining the act, with a growing interest in modernizing healthcare through IT. By the end of last year, 16 bills related to health IT had been introduced in the House and Senate. For HIM professionals, getting involved begins with seeing that the issue of interoperability is evolving and ongoing. There is, and will continue to be, a need for HIM advocacy and expertise in resolving many of the standards that will create accurate, complete, private, and secure data sharing.

Wallace advises against looking for a silver bullet. Look for the inherited processes and technologies that hinder interoperability and change those as you can, he said.

These local data exchange networks are serving as laboratories of interoperability, working out the policies and technicalities of interoperable data exchange. There is plenty of essential work to be done today, tomorrow, and in the years ahead, he said.

There is an important shift to make in how we think and how we talk about interoperability, according to Frisse. Healthcare professionals need to think of themselves as consumers as well as professionals, he says.

They should consider how the current system does not work for themselves and their families. When ONC announced four contracts for developing a nationwide health information network in November, work began on the final of what the office considers to be the four building blocks of an interoperable network for the exchange of healthcare information.

Under the contracts, four collaborative efforts will demonstrate models for a standards-based national data exchange network in the coming year. The models will demonstrate patient identification and record location, user authentication and access controls, and the feasibility of large-scale deployment. The contracts are significant because they will result in demonstrations of nationwide interoperability, the step beyond the enterprise and regional networks currently under way.

In October ONC had awarded contracts for the three other priority areas, initiatives on IT product certification, data standards, and privacy and security. The first of the earlier contracts addresses the need for certified electronic health record products, establishing a set of functions and specifications that guarantee products are interoperable.

That seal of approval should help spur sales by assuring providers the certified system can deliver. Certified EHRs should also help prevent failed implementations that could discourage further progress. Commercial certification on the first set of standards, for ambulatory EHR products, is expected to begin in the spring, with the first certifications appearing in the summer.

ONC is also prodding the industry to settle on standards for communicating health data. These are the wide variety of technical specifications that will allow data to follow patients from facility to facility and region to region, enabling information to be entered once and used multiple times.

The contract requests a process for harmonizing the raft of standards now in existence. Lastly, ONC issued a contract addressing privacy and security, central to interoperability and the future nationwide network for several reasons.

Ensuring that data remain secure and confidential as their mobility is dramatically increased is vital in its own right, and it is vital in securing consumer confidence in data exchange. Repeatedly, privacy and security issues top the list of public concerns with a potential nationwide data network.

The ONC contract focuses on the balance of protection and access, the need to maintain privacy and security without sacrificing nationwide mobility. Given the variations in organizational business policies and state laws, there is concern that a patient could cross state lines, for example, but his or her data may be stopped at the border.