Health Standards

Healthcare & Technology Resources

What Are the Primary Benefits of HL7 V2 versus HL7 V3?

By 8 Comments

In HL7 messaging, there are different HL7 standards from which to choose. HL7 terms like V2 and V3 are often used. Outlined below are the benefits of each of these HL7 standards.

HL7 V2 Benefits:

  • Reflects the complex “everyone is special” world of healthcare
  • Much less expensive to build HL7 interfaces compared to custom interfaces
  • Provides 80 percent of the interface and a framework to negotiate the remaining 20 percent on an interface-by-interface basis
  • Historically built in an ad hoc way, allowing the most critical areas to be defined first
  • Generally provides compatibility between 2.X versions

HL7 V3

  • More of a “true standard” and less of a “framework for negotiation”
  • Model-based standard provides consistency across entire standard
  • Application roles well defined
  • Much less message optionality
  • Less expensive to build and maintain mid-to-long term interfaces
  • Many decades of effort over ten year period reflecting “best and brightest” thinking

Learn more about the HL7 standards, including HL7 v3, with an in-depth white paper entitled The Evolution of HL7 (long version).

The following two tabs change content below.
My Twitter profileMy LinkedIn profile

Dave Shaver

Dave Shaver is the CTO for Corepoint Health. Dave has more than 20 years experience in training, consulting, and software development. He’s deeply involved in the HL7 standards community, including co-chair of HL7 Infrastructure and Messaging committee and co-chair of the HL7 FHIR Governance Board.

  • Pingback: HL7 Beginners Guide Article()

  • Pingback: Who Is Using HL7 3.X Messaging? | HL7 Standards()

  • Alberto

    Because the HL7 v2 is similar to a “framework for negotiation” and HL7 v3 is only more true standard.
    Is there any interoperability benefits on using HL7 v2 or HL7 v3 without CDA?

    I understand that when you use CDA you can achieve semantic interoperability between a large number of systems.
    Alberto

  • Alberto

    When I posted the last question if there are any interoperability benefits on using HL7 v2 or HL7 v3 without CDA I am talking to create a national network were we can share patient data from a large number of healthcare systems.

    Alberto

  • Swapna

    How to get schema for HL7 3.x  version..it there any standard schema available or we need to create it as per requirement?

  • HL7 Version 3 schemas are available from HL7.org.  They are free for members, or they can be purchased from the store at: https://www.hl7.org/store/index.cfm?ref=nav.

    They are standard, and there are well over 1000 schemas in the Version 3 standard based on message or document type.

  • Swapna

    Thank you.
    I got the schema’s for HL7 3.x version. But i’m not sure how to figure out which schema should be used for which HL7 2.x version for mapping.For example, what is the schema that should be used for ORU-R01

  • Unfortunately HL7 v3 is not backwards compatible with HL7 v2, so there is not a direct mapping between the two.  For your example of ORU-R01, a sample conversion can be seen at:

    http://www.ringholm.de/docs/04300_en.htm

    Often the receiving application will specify what types of v3 messages they can receive, which will narrow down the choices.  Also, the content many v2 message types can be mapped into a v3 CDA document, and the CDA document seems to be more commonly supported than other specific v3 message types.

    Good luck!