Card Tech Minutes 2016.11.02

Attendees

• Chris Melo, Philips, Co-chair
• Nick Gawrit, Heartbase, Co-chair
• Paul Dow, ACC, Secretary
• Rebecca Baker, ACC
• Charles Thomas, University of Washington
• Dan Murphy, Epic

Minutes

• December meeting update - planning

Paul will contact the ACC meeting planner to block hotel rooms for Tues - Wed nights. The meeting will take place from 9am to 4pm, compressing the three days into two. More details to follow.

• Technical Evaluation of Detailed Proposals
  • Cath Report Content Update -

Nick Gawrit - the profile has slipped out of date and this was based on CDA 1.1. The goal is to get it CDA 2.1. [We may need to analyze the changes that would occur in the templates and the value sets, which is not an insignificant effort.] We need to adjust the pre- and post- lesions as observations that was developed for CRC 4.0. Some of the work was completed courtesy of Charles Thomas and the TAVR profile. The use cases haven't changed. There may be an opportunity to harmonize with version 5.0. The goal is see if EPRC-IE could use the same templates for this profile. There will be some work to consider the Structured Report from Jimmy Tcheng MD. Risks the standards could change, will we have enough capacity to do the work? Harmonizing with EPRC-IE could make this work effort more substantial, but worthwhile. The work estimate for this profile is a medium to high effort.

• Cardiac Imaging Report Content Update

Chris Melo - The premise if to include DICOM images with diagnostic studies and based on Patient Care Coordination [PCC] Domain templates. The proposal is based on the HL7 consolidated CDA and leveraging the CRC templates and value sets. There is interest in the vendor community to get into structured reporting. Using the IHE PCC format is not widely adopted, which may put this at risk. There had been codes submitted to LOINC and SNOMED for use in this template. We'll need to check to see the progress of those requests. Having the CIRC profile align with CRC and EPRC-IE should make all of them more valuable. Especially from the lessons learned since its publication in 2011. The use cases are still valid, and won't require extensive updating. The templates and value sets would also be similar with some time needed for confirming the changes have not occurred. There are no integration statements from vendors that support CIRC as a content creator. It still is in trial implementation, which could break backward compatibility. No CPs have been submitted. The work estimate for this profile is a medium effort. This would streamline things and make it more likely to be adopted. This could become the de facto standard for all imaging structured reporting.

It is worth considering to blend these two proposals into one larger profile? This does seem to provide more synergy and opportunity for vendor adoption. Chris and Nick will work off-line to consider how they could be blended and present the topic next week.

• AOB

Cardiology Technical Committee