PCCTech Minutes 2010 11 18: Difference between revisions

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
LHeermann (talk | contribs)
1,508 edits
No edit summary
LHeermann (talk | contribs)
1,508 edits
 
(21 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Attendees: Laura Heermann, Tone Southerland, Audrey Dickerson, Mike McCoy  
Attendees: Laura Heermann, Tone Southerland, Audrey Dickerson, Mike McCoy, Anne Diamond, Charles Rica, Tom Kuhn, Philip DePalo, Keith Boone, Luann Whittenburg, Virginia Saba


Call in Attendees:
Call in Attendees: Mary Jungers, Lisa Nelson, Jean Millar, Denise Downing, Richard Morris (representing Mike Davis from the VA), John Donnelly, Barbara Hewes, Ed Ballerini, Carol Gaumer








9:30 – 10:00ET  Joint with QRPH re: Clarification on a Trial Implementation Supplement testing issue affecting MCH, LDS and PPVS
==Joint with QRPH re: Clarification on a Trial Implementation Supplement testing issue affecting MCH, LDS and PPVS==
 
===Issue:===


Issue
We have identified one issue that affects profiles in PCC and QRPH domains, so we are addressing the issue to both committees simultaneously, hoping that one consistent resolution can be provided. The issue has to do with the referencing of multiple individuals in one document.
As you may recall, in September we clarified that:
•      the document would have only a single record target, meaning that there would be one and only one patient role and we agreed that would be the mother.
•      A mechanism would be added to a section which identified to whom the information pertained, such the record target, a child, or the father of the fetus.
In the MCH HBS, LDS and PPVS supplements, the specifications calls out sections that should be included for the mother, child or father of the fetus, but no information or samples are included to show how to identify the other individuals or how to comply code the sections with information that identifies the individual to which they pertain.
Also, the LDS and PPVS profiles specify the use of “uber-sections” which are made up of underlying sections. The specification is not clear about how to implement this construct and no conformance examples are provided. Plus, in some places such as in PPVS, information (Observation for Circumcision) in a section (Procedures and Interventions) within an uber-section (Newborn Delivery Information) which is listed as information pertaining to the Mother.  This does not make sense. It appears the “uber-section” issue further complicates the “multiple people” issue.
Further, The Trial Supplement for Mother and Child-Health Birth Summary (MCHHBS) documents header information as if there were multiple patient roles. The current document, as written, will likely be confusing to implementers of this profile for the Connectathon.
Request
Please clarify the following so we can complete the task of building sample CDAs for testing the MCHHBS, LDS and PPVS profiles:
Given that each CDA document will have only one patient role in the record target,
Given that each CDA document will have only one patient role in the record target,
1.      What are the mechanisms for identifying an individual different from the record target (ie a child or a father of the fetus) and indicating that a section of information is associated with a specific individual?
1.      What are the mechanisms for identifying an individual different from the record target (ie a child or a father of the fetus) and indicating that a section of information is associated with a specific individual?
2.      What is the xml conformance for specifying an “uber-section” (no examples are included) and how do we handle an uber-section that has sections referencing different people?
2.      What is the xml conformance for specifying an “uber-section” (no examples are included) and how do we handle an uber-section that has sections referencing different people?
3.      How do you want to address the need to clean up the way the header elements are documented in the MCH profile?  
 
We need this information to complete the tests for these profiles.  Would you please review this “multiple people” issue with your committees and let us know how you would like to proceed on developing a resolution?
3.      How do you want to address the need to clean up the way the header elements are documented in the MCH profile?
 
Next action:  Tone and Lisa to work on creating example to solve immediate issue for Connectathon. Then each profile team will need to create a Change Proposal for each of the profiles in question.  Michelle Williamson will work with Lory Forquet to address the referencing issues with the MCH issue.  Tone and Lisa will address LDS and PPVS. 
 
 
===Issue:===
 
How do we document which profiles exist and what they do so they can be referenced and not duplicated.
 
1.  Need a template registry (will name is something to indicate to its being specific to IHE - Such as Profile Template Registry
** People agree to this in theory - but no one has been willing to take on the responsibility. 
** QRPH members (Wendy and Wendy) will take a lead role on this to create requirements and initial prototypes for feedback and review to the Domain Committee Co-chairs.  Goal = to have a proposal/plan by the Feb F2F meeting
 
1.5 Also need a Implementation Guide = Tone will draft this as time allows. 
 
2.  Some profiles are of a general topic, but have very specific content that limits the reuse.  
** Suggestion: The 2nd profile should be created as a more generally applicable template then have a change proposal created to get the initial one to become a "constraint" of the more generally written one.
 
==Change Proposals:==
===PPVS:===
* Laura Bright - please get this document updated on the wiki to get a number assigned to it. 
* Anne will be the content expert for this.  Tone will be the technical expert assigned to it. (Assign to Ann on the wiki, update to assigned and give it today's date)
 
===Nursing Problem Subset.===
* Objective is to add a 3rd value set to the PPOC.  The value set is a SnoMED/UMLS List
* Audrey is the content expert and owner of this CP.  She will be completing this template and getting it to Laura H. 
* Tone will be the technical expert to help with the template IDs etc. 
* Audrey will set up the calls needed to discuss the template and what needs to be done to complete it.  This call could be shared with the PPVS work above since it is very similar work to be done. Tone requests to work with both Anne and Audrey at the same time. 
* Need to find some place to put the excel spreadsheet with the content. 
 
 
===CP 59===
* Laura B and Tone have had a few email about this and are still working on it. Will set up a call when this is ready, get a quorum and vote on it then.
 
===CP 71===
* Still in progress.  Tone continue to work on it. No questions or discussion at this time.
 
===CP 85===
* Still in progress.  Tone continue to work on it. No questions or discussion at this time.
 
===CP 86===
* Need to work with Laura B.  Team thinks this may be done is only needs updating on the wiki site and move to "completed"
 
===CP 42  IC - conformance Sample Schematron ===
* Request is to add Authors and Informants and Comments
* Assign this to Tone, and move to assigned with today's date.
 
===CP 66===
* Still in progress.  Keith continues to work on it.  No quesitons or discussion at this time.
 
===CP Edit Content Module Names ===
* this one looks like CP 59.  Laura B to clean up (remove this if this is part of 59 or whatever is needed to clean it up)
 
===CP Reconcilliation of Outpaitnet Visit Modules===
* Would like to assign to Laura B
 
===CP Publish EDES Profiles===
* Needs to be republished similar to the Antepartum and Labor and Delivery Profiles.  This work when we do our publishing next summer.  Move to assigned, and assign to Tone (with Laura B assistance as co-chair)
 
===CP OID ===
* Need to update the integration profiles affected to be content module supplement of this year in the CP - Wendy Schriber will do that.
* Proposal is to update the CDA content Moduale to reflect the work Cancer in front of the Occupaitonal History section.
* Will also need to point to the template ID to the Social History
* Need to have an hour to work on this as a joint committee in next meeting (Along with time for Tone to meet with Wendy)
   
 
===CP 82  Treat effective time under advance directive as an interval===
* Motion made and 2nded to accept the CP as written.
* No discussion required
* No objections
* No abstentions
* Motion passes unanimous.
* Philip DePalo will become a volume 2 final text editor and will make this change with the assistance of Tone as Philip learns to make these changes.
 
 
===CP 64===
* This is applicable to the Issue discussed with Lisa/Mary this morning. 
* Motion made and 2nded to accept the CP as written.
* No discussion required
* No objections
* No abstentions
* Motion passes unanimous.
* Philip DePalo will become a volume 2 final text editor and will make this change with the assistance of Tone as Philip learns to make these changes.
 
 
==Nursing Workflow  Nursing Sub-Committee presented by Audrey Dickerson==
* Profile is one cycle behind in development of documentation due to it being suggested at last Planning Committee F2F in October.  Brief Profile Proposal Reveiwed. 
* Discussion:  Is nursing profile something that stands up on its own or is it something that changes in iterations as it goes throught the steps of other workflows. 
* Need  How might the vendors implement the nursing profiles.  Will likely need several use cases that will blend together the different nursing peices.
* The profiles (such as PPOC) meta data that identifies it as unique includes date/time creation and location of creation.
* Need to include enough in the use case for engineers to understand the clinical site, users, "when" the document will be created, and "when" it would be consumed.
* Create document that demonstrates the passage of PPOC thru General categories of general outpt to inpt, inpt to home care, then could "hang" the other profiles (FSA etc) onto that structure. 
* Don't want to call it a white paper, because it will persist so call it more a "implementation guide". 
 
==Reconciliation presented by Keith Boone==
* Discussion re: relevance to interoperability indicates thie profile is relevant.  It's intent is to define the requirements of what the OUTPUT of a reconciling engine should be, and what the potential inputs could be into the reconciling engine (i.e. these should be evaluated and included in the reconciliation)
* Discussion of scoping and data element to include - consensus to do active problems, family is a low priority.  social history,  smoking and alcholism are med priority.  Top three priority are problems, meds, allergies,  Med priority = smoking alcholism and immunizations, Family history is low priority.  Goal will be to reconcile the 1st 3 priorities in the order of problems, allergies then meds this year if the team has time.
* This project is getting support from 3 vendors who are already or are interested in doing the reconciliation engine and also supports Meaningful Use Phase 1.
* Priority list  address items in this order
** Problems
** Allergeies
** Medications
** Future work is social history and immunizations order of these yet to be decided
 
==Interfacility Transport presented by Philip DePalo==
* work to rewrite the detailed proposal to reflect the desire to have this be a more general profile with the intent being to have this be the overall transfer profile where EDES, ETC, EDR and this transport profile become constraints of the overall general profile.
 
==Announcement==
* Keith encourages members of this committee to get involved in the work from HL7 on the structured documents working group.

Latest revision as of 14:13, 19 November 2010

Attendees: Laura Heermann, Tone Southerland, Audrey Dickerson, Mike McCoy, Anne Diamond, Charles Rica, Tom Kuhn, Philip DePalo, Keith Boone, Luann Whittenburg, Virginia Saba

Call in Attendees: Mary Jungers, Lisa Nelson, Jean Millar, Denise Downing, Richard Morris (representing Mike Davis from the VA), John Donnelly, Barbara Hewes, Ed Ballerini, Carol Gaumer



Joint with QRPH re: Clarification on a Trial Implementation Supplement testing issue affecting MCH, LDS and PPVS

Issue:

Given that each CDA document will have only one patient role in the record target,

1. What are the mechanisms for identifying an individual different from the record target (ie a child or a father of the fetus) and indicating that a section of information is associated with a specific individual?

2. What is the xml conformance for specifying an “uber-section” (no examples are included) and how do we handle an uber-section that has sections referencing different people?

3. How do you want to address the need to clean up the way the header elements are documented in the MCH profile?

Next action: Tone and Lisa to work on creating example to solve immediate issue for Connectathon. Then each profile team will need to create a Change Proposal for each of the profiles in question. Michelle Williamson will work with Lory Forquet to address the referencing issues with the MCH issue. Tone and Lisa will address LDS and PPVS.


Issue:

How do we document which profiles exist and what they do so they can be referenced and not duplicated.

1. Need a template registry (will name is something to indicate to its being specific to IHE - Such as Profile Template Registry

    • People agree to this in theory - but no one has been willing to take on the responsibility.
    • QRPH members (Wendy and Wendy) will take a lead role on this to create requirements and initial prototypes for feedback and review to the Domain Committee Co-chairs. Goal = to have a proposal/plan by the Feb F2F meeting

1.5 Also need a Implementation Guide = Tone will draft this as time allows.

2. Some profiles are of a general topic, but have very specific content that limits the reuse.

    • Suggestion: The 2nd profile should be created as a more generally applicable template then have a change proposal created to get the initial one to become a "constraint" of the more generally written one.

Change Proposals:

PPVS:

  • Laura Bright - please get this document updated on the wiki to get a number assigned to it.
  • Anne will be the content expert for this. Tone will be the technical expert assigned to it. (Assign to Ann on the wiki, update to assigned and give it today's date)

Nursing Problem Subset.

  • Objective is to add a 3rd value set to the PPOC. The value set is a SnoMED/UMLS List
  • Audrey is the content expert and owner of this CP. She will be completing this template and getting it to Laura H.
  • Tone will be the technical expert to help with the template IDs etc.
  • Audrey will set up the calls needed to discuss the template and what needs to be done to complete it. This call could be shared with the PPVS work above since it is very similar work to be done. Tone requests to work with both Anne and Audrey at the same time.
  • Need to find some place to put the excel spreadsheet with the content.


CP 59

  • Laura B and Tone have had a few email about this and are still working on it. Will set up a call when this is ready, get a quorum and vote on it then.

CP 71

  • Still in progress. Tone continue to work on it. No questions or discussion at this time.

CP 85

  • Still in progress. Tone continue to work on it. No questions or discussion at this time.

CP 86

  • Need to work with Laura B. Team thinks this may be done is only needs updating on the wiki site and move to "completed"

CP 42 IC - conformance Sample Schematron

  • Request is to add Authors and Informants and Comments
  • Assign this to Tone, and move to assigned with today's date.

CP 66

  • Still in progress. Keith continues to work on it. No quesitons or discussion at this time.

CP Edit Content Module Names

  • this one looks like CP 59. Laura B to clean up (remove this if this is part of 59 or whatever is needed to clean it up)

CP Reconcilliation of Outpaitnet Visit Modules

  • Would like to assign to Laura B

CP Publish EDES Profiles

  • Needs to be republished similar to the Antepartum and Labor and Delivery Profiles. This work when we do our publishing next summer. Move to assigned, and assign to Tone (with Laura B assistance as co-chair)

CP OID

  • Need to update the integration profiles affected to be content module supplement of this year in the CP - Wendy Schriber will do that.
  • Proposal is to update the CDA content Moduale to reflect the work Cancer in front of the Occupaitonal History section.
  • Will also need to point to the template ID to the Social History
  • Need to have an hour to work on this as a joint committee in next meeting (Along with time for Tone to meet with Wendy)


CP 82 Treat effective time under advance directive as an interval

  • Motion made and 2nded to accept the CP as written.
  • No discussion required
  • No objections
  • No abstentions
  • Motion passes unanimous.
  • Philip DePalo will become a volume 2 final text editor and will make this change with the assistance of Tone as Philip learns to make these changes.


CP 64

  • This is applicable to the Issue discussed with Lisa/Mary this morning.
  • Motion made and 2nded to accept the CP as written.
  • No discussion required
  • No objections
  • No abstentions
  • Motion passes unanimous.
  • Philip DePalo will become a volume 2 final text editor and will make this change with the assistance of Tone as Philip learns to make these changes.


Nursing Workflow Nursing Sub-Committee presented by Audrey Dickerson

  • Profile is one cycle behind in development of documentation due to it being suggested at last Planning Committee F2F in October. Brief Profile Proposal Reveiwed.
  • Discussion: Is nursing profile something that stands up on its own or is it something that changes in iterations as it goes throught the steps of other workflows.
  • Need How might the vendors implement the nursing profiles. Will likely need several use cases that will blend together the different nursing peices.
  • The profiles (such as PPOC) meta data that identifies it as unique includes date/time creation and location of creation.
  • Need to include enough in the use case for engineers to understand the clinical site, users, "when" the document will be created, and "when" it would be consumed.
  • Create document that demonstrates the passage of PPOC thru General categories of general outpt to inpt, inpt to home care, then could "hang" the other profiles (FSA etc) onto that structure.
  • Don't want to call it a white paper, because it will persist so call it more a "implementation guide".

Reconciliation presented by Keith Boone

  • Discussion re: relevance to interoperability indicates thie profile is relevant. It's intent is to define the requirements of what the OUTPUT of a reconciling engine should be, and what the potential inputs could be into the reconciling engine (i.e. these should be evaluated and included in the reconciliation)
  • Discussion of scoping and data element to include - consensus to do active problems, family is a low priority. social history, smoking and alcholism are med priority. Top three priority are problems, meds, allergies, Med priority = smoking alcholism and immunizations, Family history is low priority. Goal will be to reconcile the 1st 3 priorities in the order of problems, allergies then meds this year if the team has time.
  • This project is getting support from 3 vendors who are already or are interested in doing the reconciliation engine and also supports Meaningful Use Phase 1.
  • Priority list address items in this order
    • Problems
    • Allergeies
    • Medications
    • Future work is social history and immunizations order of these yet to be decided

Interfacility Transport presented by Philip DePalo

  • work to rewrite the detailed proposal to reflect the desire to have this be a more general profile with the intent being to have this be the overall transfer profile where EDES, ETC, EDR and this transport profile become constraints of the overall general profile.

Announcement

  • Keith encourages members of this committee to get involved in the work from HL7 on the structured documents working group.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=PCCTech_Minutes_2010_11_18&oldid=46575"