PaLM Conf Minutes 2017-Jan-11

From IHE Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Back to IHE Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (PaLM) Domain

Back to IHE Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (PaLM)Technical Committee Page

Recording

The recording for this meeting can be downloaded HERE

Attendees

Francois Macary, Co-Chair Phast
Raj Dash, Co-Chair CAP
Riki Merrick, Co-Chair APHL
Carolyn Knapik CAP, secretariat
Mary Kennedy CAP, secretariat
Alessandro Sulis CRS4
Dan Rutz Epic
David de Mena SAS
Filip Migom MIPS
Francesca Frexia CRS4
Francesca Vanzo Arsenal IT
Gunter Haroske IHE Germany
James Harrison CAP
JD Nolen Cerner
Jurgen De Decker MIPS
Laurent Lardin bioMerieux
Megumi Kondo Sakura Finetek Japan
Ross Simpson CAP

Minutes

Agenda Review

1st hour

  • Housekeeping: Validation of PaLM report at next Board call (Mary, François)
    • Have presented the PaLM report on the DCC call, is on agenda for tomorrow’s Board meeting – Raj presenting, Mary also attending, mention expansion of the PaLM domain as we accepted that new proposal
  • https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vjX0lYn4xVEVynpoelvLRe_TzXD5KJ2EyDEQ6WIY0w0/edit#gid=1920926816 General publication schedule for 2017 (François)
    • The 4 supplements in this schedule are:
      • LCC profile
      • SET profile
      • LSH profile
      • APSR 2.0
  • Review of new profile "Blood Product Coordination" proposal for the 2017-2018 cycle (Riki + Dan)
    • Joint effort at EPIC and MIPS and Duke
      • Parts of the blood transfusion workflow, coordination clinical LIS, blood bank LIS and clinical EMR:
        • for account number matching
        • messages to use for status progression from the blood bank
        • messages for corrections and when to issue those
      • Duke just put a paper with use cases together that can be used as basis (e.g. rare AB in patients for example)
      • For Netherlands focus on:
        • final step when blood bank product is sent from lab to transfusion location
        • Product administration = transfusion has been started or blood bag returned to lab (status codes; have transfusion completed and in progress, but not a begin or hold; also share end time)
        • Product management – a lot of blood bank software can electronically dispense into remote refrigerator and then it needs to get picked up and then be able to do electronic crossmatch between the LIS – refrigerator and handheld at time of dispense
        • Exclude clear supply transactions (how much units vs patient specific units) – may be anything eligible for crossmatching and dispensing
      • Important to emphasize is notion of communication of statuses and event and allergies (rare blood type, difficult blood matching expected) – similar to the genetic tests that affect medication dispense = pharmacogenetics – so these are stable lab results that should stay accessible to the docs
      • For the first pass focus on the administration and status piece to get market support
      • External communication for blood product for a specific patient and what happened to it once dispensed
      • Prefer starting with use case 2 – 4 and then go to 1, if we want to at a later time
      • Supplement development – all into the same profile or into different profiles – review the use cases and make decision based on each one
        • Items 3 and 4 are one use case – both from admin system to blood bank
        • Item 2 flesh out with auto dispense (not inventory and re-ordering supply)
        • Item 1 separately as well
      • How does medical staff know how many units are available and when that availability expires – covered by 1a
      • This will affect the scope of our domain and so we will need to update that – it has been mentioned to the DCC and will bring up as part of the report to the IHE board
      • Motion to accept this proposal and Francois, JD, further discussion: would it be worthwhile to communicate that we are working on this to seek out more experts – yes will need to get Haemonetics, Mediware, and another European and Asian company (Raj can reach out to Haemonetics) will reach out to transfusion medical folks know – yes that is important, prepare communication to go out based on this proposal, once proposal is on the website against: 0, abstain: 0, all in favor
  • APSR 2.0 update (Gunter)
    • See slides
    • Slide 4 – if you are grossing a specimen and cut them into smaller pieces and then create derivatives form each of the  - would we ever need to have one producer ties to multiple specimen – that is covered by creating separate instances – all will have the same performer - the specific participant PRD = child specimen after the preparation; participant CSM = consumable (for additive; e.g. 10% buffered formalin)
    • Do we need more than one parent specimen for a child – yes
    • For Raj’s example Francois and Gunter came up with 2 valid versions of the representation
      • First pass had a lot of errors and those have ALL been corrected
    • Will need more examples – have receives breast and lymph node excision example from Raj – working through that
  • Proposal of a digital pathology session during EU Connectathon in Venice (Francesca)
  •  

2nd hour

  • LCC review (Riki, Jim)
    • Describe the new OBX and then express that the rest follows vol 2.x to avoid duplication of specification – this also applies to the ORC and other segments
    • Will have updated version sent out for more detailed review on the February call
  • Microbiology guide: Update on comments (Laurent)
    • Riki sent comments back
    • Some are directed to the content of the guide to be more international
    • Laurent reviewed the LRI content and noticed some differences and so shared this with Riki for submission to LRI ballot which has been done – will wait for reconciliation, which is the last one of the lab guides to be done (LRI has about 700 comments, LOI about 200, eDOS about 80 – we are 64% done with those already)
    • Will see what LRI will accept and we may want to have a CP to harmonize the TF as well as the micro guide – will have to see if this works, even if it is not exactly what the French version is doing; can also bring this back to France for implementation consideration
    • Make the English version the international version based on the French guide
    • Any other comments, please send to Laurent
  • SET update – Alessandro
    • Working on the blood banking use case and will share the Vol 1 document on the google group and bring back up for approval on Feb call – plan 30 min minimum for this
    • First draft for Vol 2 also for Feb call with options of message types to use, so we can decide the message type

Next call is 2/8 - will plan on 2 hours