Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) and Clinical Document Architecture (CDA) are standards for the healthcare industry, designed to improve the exchange of health data by interoperability. Both standards are constrained through what are known as Implementation Guides (IG) for specific use.
OBJECTIVE: Both of these two standards are widely in use and play an important role in the Austrian healthcare system. Concepts existing in CDA and FHIR must be aligned between both standards.
METHODS: Many existing approaches are presented and discussed, none are fully suited to the needs in Austria.
RESULTS: The IG Publisher has already been used for CDA IGs, beside of its intended FHIR support, but never for both in one IG. Even the International Patient Summary (IPS), existing as CDA and FHIR specification, does not solve the needed comparability between these two.
CONCLUSIONS: As the IG Publisher is widely used and supports CDA, it should be used for Dual Implementation Guides. Further work and extension of IG Publisher is necessary to enhance the readability of the resulting IGs.
OBJECTIVE: Both of these two standards are widely in use and play an important role in the Austrian healthcare system. Concepts existing in CDA and FHIR must be aligned between both standards.
METHODS: Many existing approaches are presented and discussed, none are fully suited to the needs in Austria.
RESULTS: The IG Publisher has already been used for CDA IGs, beside of its intended FHIR support, but never for both in one IG. Even the International Patient Summary (IPS), existing as CDA and FHIR specification, does not solve the needed comparability between these two.
CONCLUSIONS: As the IG Publisher is widely used and supports CDA, it should be used for Dual Implementation Guides. Further work and extension of IG Publisher is necessary to enhance the readability of the resulting IGs.
摘要：
背景：快速医疗保健互操作性资源（FHIR）和临床文档体系结构（CDA）是医疗保健行业的标准，旨在通过互操作性改善健康数据的交换。这两个标准都受到特定用途的所谓实施指南(IG)的约束。
目的：这两个标准都被广泛使用，在奥地利的医疗保健系统中发挥着重要作用。CDA和FHIR中存在的概念必须在两个标准之间保持一致。
方法：介绍和讨论了许多现有方法，没有一个完全适合奥地利的需要。
结果：IGPublisher已经用于CDAIG，除了其预期的FHIR支持之外，但从来没有在一个IG。即使是国际患者摘要(IPS)，作为CDA和FHIR规范存在，并不能解决这两者之间所需的可比性。
结论：由于IGPublisher被广泛使用并支持CDA，它应该用于双重实施指南。IGPublisher的进一步工作和扩展对于增强所得IG的可读性是必要的。
目的：这两个标准都被广泛使用，在奥地利的医疗保健系统中发挥着重要作用。CDA和FHIR中存在的概念必须在两个标准之间保持一致。
方法：介绍和讨论了许多现有方法，没有一个完全适合奥地利的需要。
结果：IGPublisher已经用于CDAIG，除了其预期的FHIR支持之外，但从来没有在一个IG。即使是国际患者摘要(IPS)，作为CDA和FHIR规范存在，并不能解决这两者之间所需的可比性。
结论：由于IGPublisher被广泛使用并支持CDA，它应该用于双重实施指南。IGPublisher的进一步工作和扩展对于增强所得IG的可读性是必要的。
