HiT4EMR · COMP 4090 · Health Informatics (T402)

Maple Grove
Family Health Centre

A simulated OpenEMR implementation designed around a Toronto, Ontario primary-care context.

The HiT4EMR student team explored, configured, tested and documented a shared OpenEMR environment across clinical workflow, infrastructure, security, UI/UX, interoperability, analytics, QA and documentation.

OpenEMR May–August 2026 Toronto, Ontario Synthetic data only

The project

A course project built around a fictional clinic

HiT4EMR is the COMP 4090 course project. The student cohort created Maple Grove Family Health Centre as a fictitious clinic identity and shared Toronto/Ontario primary-care context.

Teams then examined how OpenEMR could support that setting across clinical workflow, infrastructure, security, usability, interoperability, analytics and testing before bringing the subteams together around a shared MVP.

Simulated clinic

A student-created clinic identity gave every subteam the same clinical and operational context.

Shared environment

A browser-accessible OpenEMR 7.0.2 deployment on AWS supported final integration and demonstration.

Cross-team implementation

Clinical, technical and operational subteams converged into shared workflows and evidence.

Maple Grove Family Health Centre Fictional clinic identity created for the HiT4EMR project
OpenEMR clinical encounter showing synthetic patient George Lee with SOAP intake and vitals documentation
Clinical workflow in the shared environmentSOAP intake and vitals documented during the August 1 simulation.

Project journey

From broad exploration to an integrated MVP

Early work was distributed across teams and environments. By mid-July, the project narrowed around a shared MVP and common testing environment.

  1. MayDiscovery & environment setupInitial OpenEMR exploration, clinic context and technical setup.
  2. JuneSubteam developmentWorkflow, UI/UX, security, interoperability, analytics and documentation work expanded.
  3. Mid-JulyMVP convergenceTeams aligned around the shared OpenEMR 7 environment and a concrete integration path.
  4. July 25Integrated testingConnected workflows were exercised before final demonstration.
  5. August 1Go-Live simulationThree patient scenarios were run in three breakout rooms.
  6. August 5–8Evidence & closeoutFinal documentation, lessons learned and project package consolidation.

Clinical workflow

Following the patient journey across roles

Research and clinical workflow work established the simulated clinic context and translated primary-care processes into journeys that could be exercised in OpenEMR.

  1. Arrival
    01Appointment
    02Check-in
  2. Assessment
    03Nursing assessment
  3. Clinical care
    04Provider encounter
    05Lab / orders
  4. Closeout
    06Follow-up
    07Checkout
  5. Patient access
    08Patient portal
Final scenarios
Chronic-disease follow-up Annual preventive care Same-day acute visit

Technology & standards

Technology used across the project

Core platform technologies are separated from languages, extensions and healthcare standards.

Core platform
OpenEMR 7.0.2EMR platform
AWSAWS EC2Shared cloud environment
D DockerContainerized deployment
DB MariaDBApplication database
Healthcare interoperability & standards
FHIR R4Clinical API exchange
HL7 v2Lab messaging
C-CDAPatient summary export
LOINCLab terminology
ICD-10ICD-10Diagnosis coding
OAuth2OAuth2API authorization
Development & technical extensions
PHPPHP
PYPython
JavaScript
HTMLHTML5
CSSCSS
BASHBashCommand-line shell
LinuxLinuxServer environment

Interoperability

FHIR and lab workflows

The team used OpenEMR’s FHIR API to retrieve clinical data and tested a mock lab order-and-result workflow with synthetic data.

FHIR R4 Read clinical data

Authenticated requests retrieved Patient, Observation and DiagnosticReport resources.

HL7 v2 Mock lab workflow

Orders and results were tested with a simulated lab, not a live external laboratory.

Postman showing an authenticated OpenEMR FHIR DiagnosticReport request returning a 200 OK JSON response
Authenticated FHIR DiagnosticReport retrieval Postman · GET request · 200 OK · JSON response from the project OpenEMR environment.

Subteams

One project, eight areas of focus

The public showcase describes the project collectively while keeping each subteam visible.

01

Research & Clinical Workflow

Mapped clinic workflows and built the patient journeys used in testing.

02

Infrastructure & Deployment

Ran shared OpenEMR environments on AWS, including HTTPS, backups and troubleshooting.

03

Security & Compliance

Reviewed roles, access controls, privacy risks and production-readiness gaps.

04

UI/UX

Audited key workflows, applied feasible UI changes and proposed improvements.

05

Interoperability

Tested FHIR API access, HL7 lab workflows and supporting clinical standards.

06

Analytics

Mapped useful KPIs to OpenEMR data and documented reporting limits.

07

QA & Testing

Turned workflows into test cases and coordinated integrated testing and Go-Live.

08

Documentation

Built user guides, role cards and the final project evidence package.

Analytics example

Making OpenEMR activity easier to understand

A custom education dashboard summarized OpenEMR audit activity and education-module events into a quick cohort-level view.

Audit activity Cohort metrics Activity summaries

Education module source on GitHub ↗

Maple Grove Education Dashboard in OpenEMR showing cohort audit activity metrics including active students, logins, chart sessions and record changes
Maple Grove Education Dashboard A custom dashboard built around OpenEMR audit activity and education-module events.

UI/UX example

Adapting patient registration for Canada

The UI/UX team simplified registration labels and fields, then changed the province list from U.S. states to Canadian provinces and territories.

Clearer labels Simpler fields Canadian provinces
Customized OpenEMR patient registration form with the Personal Information heading and simplified labels
Registration labels simplified for the clinic workflow.
OpenEMR patient registration form showing a Canadian provinces and territories dropdown
Province options changed from U.S. states to Canada.

Integrated testing & Go-Live simulation

Putting the pieces together

During the Go-Live simulation, three breakout rooms each ran a different patient journey. The exercise focused on whether role handoffs, permissions, documentation, lab activity, appointments and patient-facing interactions worked together in the configured environment.

OpenEMR calendar used during the August 1 Go-Live simulation with synthetic patient appointments
Scheduling & check-inFront-office activity during the Go-Live simulation.
Mock laboratory results portal showing a synthetic HbA1c result in the simulated HL7 laboratory workflow
Clinical + lab workflowA mock HbA1c result processed through the simulated laboratory stand-in.
Maple Grove patient portal showing synthetic medications and health issues for the project test patient
Patient-facing follow-upPortal access to patient-facing clinical information.

What testing showed

The three patient scenarios were completed, but testing also found issues with role permissions, portal access, navigation, and some workflow handoffs. These were documented and used to improve project guidance and recommendations.

Lessons learned

What we learned

01

Align environments early

Version and environment differences created avoidable integration friction.

02

Narrow to an MVP

A defined integration scope made cross-team testing much more manageable.

03

Test the whole workflow

Roles, permissions and handoffs matter as much as individual features.

04

Document what breaks

Clear guides, support and honest limitation notes made troubleshooting useful.

Beyond the simulation

A demonstration, not a production deployment.

Real clinical use would require additional privacy governance, security operations, recovery planning, monitoring and Ontario health-system integrations.

Security & privacyRecovery & operationsOntario integrationsMonitoring & support

The project team

A cohort-wide collaborative project

HiT4EMR was completed across eight subteams. This section recognizes project leadership, key contributors and participating students while keeping each person’s roles visible.

Project Leadership

Kristina Mzhelskaia

Project Team Lead Documentation Infrastructure & Deployment Research & Clinical Workflow Security & Compliance Go-Live Integrated Testing

Zhongnan (Jordan) Yang

Project Manager UI/UX Lead Analytics Infrastructure & Deployment Go-Live Integrated Testing

James Huynh

Project Manager Infrastructure & Deployment Lead Analytics Documentation Elbow Support
Key Contributors

Green-highlighted cards recognize particularly significant contributions.

Hetakshee Koshti

Interoperability Go-Live

Janine Alyssa Atienza

UI/UX Go-Live Integrated Testing

Jhoanna Mae Agustin

UI/UX Go-Live

Kiki Pike

Analytics Lead Infrastructure & Deployment UI/UX Integrated Testing Elbow Support

Tiffany Toussaint

Research & Clinical Workflow Lead UI/UX

Tina Shen

Security & Compliance Lead Go-Live Integrated Testing

Venkata Naga Sai Charan Kota

QA & Testing Lead Integrated Testing

Vishwa Rathod

Interoperability Lead Go-Live

Yeafi Awal

Documentation Research & Clinical Workflow Go-Live Integrated Testing
Student Contributors

Akash Ashok Kumar

QA & Testing

Chinyelu Nwenweh

AnalyticsElbow Support

Esther Agyemang

Security & ComplianceUI/UX

Francis Siaw

Documentation

Frank Asare

Interoperability

George Maleko

Security & Compliance

Janvi Patel

QA & Testing

Mann Tandel

QA & Testing

Marine

Research & Clinical Workflow

Mencha Tembong

InteroperabilityUI/UXIntegrated Testing

Mohammed Irshad Syed Ali

Analytics

Omar Al-amodi

Research & Clinical WorkflowElbow Support

Oyinkansolami Ayanleye

Documentation LeadIntegrated Testing

Priyanshi Kakadiya

Analytics

Shikshya Karki

Research & Clinical Workflow

Sowmya Thulasingam

QA & Testing

Tawonga Mapfumo

Documentation

Vianey Flores Quijada

Security & Compliance

Zubariya Siddiqui

Research & Clinical Workflow

Public contributor roster includes students who opted in to be listed. Roles are based on the project roles matrix and project feedback.