Case study 03

EMR results integration

Lab results delivered into client EMRs over SMART on FHIR without asking a single clinician to change how they work.

Problem
Clinicians retyped lab results into the chart by hand, with correction risk.
What I did
Held the line on FHIR, with one bridge for legacy sites on a documented sunset.
Result
Results land in the chart with zero change to clinician workflow.
Role
Product manager
Timeframe
2 quarters
Team
5 engineers across two sites
Stack
SMART on FHIR, Epic, HL7 v2 bridge
0
clinician workflow changes
4
sites in phase one
40%
faster integration scoping

Context

Client practices receive results from our lab and record them in their own EMR, most often Epic. Integration work is gated by each client's IT calendar, not ours, which makes sequencing the real design problem.

The problem

Results arrived as PDFs. Staff opened them and typed values into the chart, which introduced transcription errors and put a clinical result behind a manual step.

I sized it from client support tickets and two site visits: how many results per day, how long each took to enter, and how often a value was corrected after the fact. I ran the same discovery process with 10+ clients and partners to define each site's integration roadmap, which cut integration scoping time by 40% once the pattern was repeatable.

Why this and not something else

Several sites asked for an SFTP drop with a custom CSV. I refused to build per-client formats. Each one becomes a permanent maintenance obligation, and none of them put the result inside the chart where the clinician actually looks.

I also did not build a portal. A portal is another login and another workflow; the point was to require no new behaviour from clinicians at all.

Decisions and tradeoffs

Standards over convenience: FHIR resources with a narrow HL7 v2 bridge for sites that could not move yet, on a documented sunset.

Phase one covered the four highest-volume result types and four sites. Discrete observation coding, amendments, and reflex ordering were deferred and written into the roadmap with the reason attached.

Lab result rendered in a test EMR. Screenshot to be added.

Constraints

Compliance review sat on the critical path, so I front-loaded the security questionnaire before engineering started. Client IT windows were narrow and rare. Timezone spread meant integration testing had to be scripted rather than watched.

Outcome

Results land in the chart on their own. The clinician workflow is unchanged, which was the constraint the whole design was built around.

0
Workflow changes asked of clinicians
0
Client sites live in phase one
0
Custom formats retired, not added

Sales started using the integration as a reason to switch labs, which was not a goal I had written down.

What I'd do differently

I underestimated how long client-side IT approvals would take and framed the timeline around our engineering capacity. Next time I would sequence the roadmap around client windows first and treat our build as the flexible part.

Open to technical product management roles.