PCD TC 2010-06-16 Webex
Patient Care Device Domain
Regularly Scheduled TC Meeting
Topic: PCD Technical Committee Meeting
Date: Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Time: 11:00 am, Eastern Time (New York)
Duration: 60 Minutes
- Agenda Approval
- Review Discussion Summary: TC meeting, on June 2, 2010 PCD TC 2010-06-02 Webex
- Ballots: Snapshot CP and WCM Supplement
- Connectathon and Showcase Planning Initiated
- TF Update: items include Should PIB be an option or a recommendation?
- Review AAMI Mini-Showcase Preparations
- Fall F2F Update
- IHE Korea Connectathon & ITI WS* Testing Support
- Deployment survey (John Donnelly)
- Detailed Proposals Review
- Action Item Review
- Additional Business
- Next Meetings
Action Items from Previous Meetings
See PCD Technical Committee Action Items page.
Significant changes, other than dates, will be in bold.
- Chair: Todd Cooper, John Rhoads
Anupriyo Chakravarti, Todd Cooper, Al Engelbert, Robert Flanders, John Garguilo, Rich Hillman, Roy Kerns, Steve Merritt, Gary Meyer, Monroe Pattillo, John Rhoads, Jeff Rinda, Erin Sparnon, Khalid Zubaidi, Manny Furst
Discussion Summaries do not require formal approval, while minutes of meetings where votes are taken do. Participants are encouraged to review and bring up significant issues with discussion summaries of previous meetings. Votes will be taken to approve meetings where votes took place; these may be email ballots.
Item Topic Discussion 1 Introductions & Agenda Review
- Agenda approved
2 Issues with Discussion Summary or Approval of Minutes
- Discussion Summary of previous meeting was accepted
3 Agenda Items
- Cochairs, Others
- ACM: Should PCD-04 be included in the final text TF? Steve described alarm communication as implying that the clinician will receive the alarm thus making PCD-04 alone not sufficient by itself. He noted that there were use cases where PCD-04 by itself will be of sufficient value to move to final text alone. He indicated that PCD-04 alone would be acceptable as long as it won’t change. Monroe noted that it will become a different message type with a new HL7 version. The concensus was that it isn’t necessary to move it to FT for vendors to implement it.
- - John Rhoads described PCD-04 as having the ability to provide MDC codes for alarms as well as additional information for context. This is optional, and he asked how a vendor will be able to indicate that it supports these additional functions. Monroe indicated that the JC and HITSP have identified three levels of alarms – just alarm, indicate severity, and then what detail, such as numerical value, is communicated. John suggested that this may be the way to represent the vendor’s capabilities.
- - Todd suggested we develop a path to final text for PCD-04 and PCD-06. John Rhoads suggested that we address the issues in the discussion and development of ACM testing.
- PIB ITI-30 discussion: Manny suggested that ADT need not be an option in PCD TF, rather just a reference to the availability of PAM and PDQ. Todd suggested that it is not necessary to include ADT capability as an option, but that it should be discussed in the user guide. It was noted that we need to work to obtain ADT support at the Connectathon and Showcase.
- WAN interface and Korean Connectathon: Todd will provide a Webex seminar this evening to help them prepare for the Connectathon. They have 5 to 7 vendors for this first time event. Todd is researching whether PCD-01 over a WAN interface requires a different transaction. This has implications for other PCD transactions, such as PCD-04.
- Manny to send CP and WCM for public comment after Al and Ken review the comments received.
The next TC meeting will be June 30, 2010 PCD TC 2010-06-30 Webex
The next PC meeting will be June 9, 2010 PCD PC 2010-06-09 Webex