Cardinality of ERR RRG^O16

From IHE Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Subject: RE: PIV test 60001 From: Rinda, Jeffrey E. [Jeffrey.Rinda@hospira.com] To: Manny Furst Cc: 'Cherkaoui, Maria'; 'Deshayes, Julien C.'; 'Garguilo, John J.'; 'Lunde, Bradley'; 'Al Engelbert'; 'Martinez, Sandra'; Rhoads, John; Ken Fuchs (Mindray)

Yes, let's go with Sandra's suggestion. ________________________________________ From: Manny Furst [efurst@imp-tech.com] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:36 PM To: Rinda, Jeffrey E. Cc: 'Cherkaoui, Maria'; 'Deshayes, Julien C.'; 'Garguilo, John J.'; 'Lunde, Bradley'; 'Al Engelbert'; 'Martinez, Sandra'; 'Rhoads, John'; Ken Fuchs (Mindray) Subject: RE: PIV test 60001

Hi Jeff, If this is acceptable this will be the direction taken, and a CP can be developed for the TF. I’m including John Rhoads and Ken as an FYI. Thanks, Manny

From: Garguilo, John J. [1] Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 12:51 PM To: Martinez, Sandra; Manny Furst; 'Lunde, Bradley'; Al Engelbert Cc: Cherkaoui, Maria; Deshayes, Julien C. Subject: RE: PIV test 60001

Manny, We will leave the decision up to you (as I’m sure you will consult with the PIV group); and then change the tooling accordingly. Thanks Sandra!

--John

From: Martinez, Sandra Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:20 PM To: Martinez, Sandra; Garguilo, John J.; Manny Furst; 'Lunde, Bradley'; Al Engelbert Cc: Cherkaoui, Maria; Deshayes, Julien C. Subject: RE: PIV test 60001

Sorry, the confusion was with the cardinality being [0..1] for usage=”R” in the 2010-TF.

Sandra

From: Martinez, Sandra Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:25 AM To: Garguilo, John J.; Manny Furst; 'Lunde, Bradley'; 'Al Engelbert' Cc: Cherkaoui, Maria; Deshayes, Julien C. Subject: RE: PIV test 60001

The confusion comes about because in the 2010 TF. RRG^16 ERR field has a usage of “R” but the cardinality is [1..1] which is a contradiction and should be fixed in the TF.

In a different e-mail Al Engelbert explained the following:

“For the 2010 TF, the allowable values for MSH-16 are AL, NE, and ER, so the ERR segment won’t be present if AL is used and no errors were detected. Because of this, I believe the ERR segment should be characterized as follows: [{ERR}], Error, C, [0..1]”.

We could go ahead and make the appropriate changes to the Context Files if everyone is in agreement, ERR will be usage=”C” and cardinality=[0..1]

Regards,

Sandra