PCD DPI 2008-09-22 WebEx

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

(DPI Profile Main Page)

Meeting Purpose

IHE PCD Device Point-of-care Integration (DPI) profile development discussions.

WebEx Information

Topic: IHE PCD DPI Profile TG

Date: Monday, September 22, 2008

Time: 10:00, Eastern Daylight Time (GMT -04:00, New York)

Duration: 90 Minutes

Note: Specific web & phone informaiton will be provided via e-mail to group members.

Contact Manny Furst for more information.

Proposed Agenda

1 Approve Minutes from previous session
2 Review Action Items
3 Review discussions from Vancouver meetings (previous week)
4 Transport technologies Discussion
5 Open discussion

Attachments / Materials

Minutes for approval:

2008.09.09 WebEx Session



Chair/Host: Todd Cooper (BSF)
Steve Borchers (Spacelabs), Maria Cherkaoui (NIST), John Garguilo (NIST), Steve Merritt (Baystate Health), John Rhoads (Philips), Jan Wittenber (Philips)


Item Topic Discussion
1 Introductions & Agenda Review
- Chair


  • Agenda approved


2 Approval of Minutes
- Chair



3 Action Items Review
- Chair

NOTE: Given F2F meetings, little progress has been made on the action items.


  • A table should be added to the main DPI wiki page to show in a central location decisions as they are made.


  • (Todd) Add "Decisions" table to the DPI wiki page.
4 Vancouver Meetings Review
- Todd

There was a general review of the standards meetings held in Vancouver 2008.09.14 - 19 (IEEE 11073 / ISO TC215 WG7 / HL7 DEV WG):

  • JIC ("WG9") Update: Sunday was a meeting of the CEN/HL7/ISO Joint Initiative Council ("JIC") that is convened (for administrative purposes only) as ISO TC215 WG9. A new "subcommittee" is being formed to address semantic harmonization / development coordination between the various groups. This will provide an additional opportunity for the 11073 semantics to be recognized within the health informatics standards community.
  • UCUM: Gunther Schadow agreed to submit UCUM to ISO TC215 for standardization. At this point, it is a specification that he maintains at the Regenstrief Institute.
  • "ICE" Review: A joint tcon was held between the Vancouver meeting participants and the ASTM F29 "ICE" (Integrated Clinical Environment) project team, which was meeting simultaneously in Cambridge MA @ CIMIT.
- An updated draft of the top-level ICE standard was reviewed - this was the first time many members of the Vancouver group had had a chance to see this version of the document.
- The group had an extended discussion of the ICE conceptual model, with some of the following observations:
  • Box #2 - Could be a combination of a:
Device Semantic Specialization Profile (not DPI specific)
DPI PnP profile
  • Box #5 - Would map to a PnP Device manager
Question:Can multiple DeviceManager actors be supported in a single ICE network?
  • Box #7=>#9 -
Question:Is presentation to (9) within the ICE scope? [Note: Hotchkiss response - "Absolutely!"]
  • Box #11 - This could be an IHE DEC Gateway
- There was also a discussion regarding the various topologies to which the ICE conceptual model could be applied, such as surgery, ICU, sub-acute ... home ...
- General opinion coming out of the Vancouver meetings was that the ICE document needed to provide a broader range of use cases, that it should address the requirements that arise from various topological deployments (or at least a framework for how those requirements may be organized and addressed), and a stronger foundation for the "-ilities" that are transitive across the conceptual model components and potential ICE deployment environments.


  • As appropriate & agreed upon, the DPI White Paper should include / reference use cases identified in the ICE document. It is the intent that PCD DPI profiles will directly support ICE compliant networks.


5 Transport Technologies
- Group

The DPI WG had a general discussion regarding the transport technologies & topologies that should be considered for DPI. These were also considered with respect to the ICE conceptual model.

  • ISO/IEEE 11073-30200: Cable connected (RS-232 & Ethernet) could be used for the ICE #4/#5 links.
  • ISO/IEEE 11073-30400 (Ethernet): Would support the #5/#7 link
  • Wireless & Infusion Pumps: Most infusion pumps today are focused on wireless connectivity, and wired links are typically only supported when absolutely necessary (at least that's the direction the industry is heading in). As a result, any DPI transport discussion must include PnP wireless connectivity.
- #8 might be a centralized infusion management system
- #4 could be a Wi-Fi connection
- Pump must be able to communicate at all times with a centralized #8 Mother Ship
- #7 is an infusion management system
- #11 could be an ADT / Pharmacy etc. interface
- #8 could be a physio monitor
- #2 would be an infusion pump
  • Based on this, an infusion pump would need to have two physical interfaces OR it would have a single radio that would:
- Establish a PoC PnP connection (e.g., to a physio monitor or local device manager)
- Support access to a remote eMAR
NOTE: A physio monitor (for example) could also provide a portal to the remote infusion management system. It would be good to draft up some use cases for this:
- Local "safety interlocks" + medication changes that require remote system validation
- PCA (see use case in ICE 3/25 document)
  • Portal "window" to remote application (wired / wireless)

<Jan will provide wording for this use case>

  • Key Wireless Issues:
- Local (10 - 15') or Wi-Fi or cloud?
- Device-patient correlation / pairing (state model)
- Segmenting data fgrom other wireless network users & applications
  • DPI, including wireless transports, must be viewed from a logical layering perspective.


  • DPI WP shall provide a layered perspective on the various required components.


6 Next Meeting
- Chair



Next Meeting

Next meeting scheduled for Thursday, 2008-10-02 @ 10:30 - 11:30 Eastern

(Reviewed & approved by PCD DPI WG 2008-10-09)

PCD Home