Card Plan Minutes 2011.10.04

Attendees

• Alan Katz - ACC
• Anthony Scinicariello - SJM
• Antje Schroeder - Siemens
• Bill Weintraub
• Bruce Ferguson
• Bryan Jennings - Medical Micrographics
• Barry Brown - Mortara
• Dan Roman - ACC
• David Slotwiner - HRS
• Gerald Serwer
• Harry Solomon - GE
• Jorge Bohorquez - Siemens
• Mary Scneider - GE
• Nick Gawrit - Heartbase
• Paul Seifert - Agfa
• Tom Dolan - Philips

Meeting Notes

• ACC would like to see development on proposals that support the PINNACLE and NCDR registries
• Strategy for 2011-2012
  • Increase adoption of existing profiles
  • Work on profiles that are a continuation of last years work items
  • Work on a max of 1-2 new profiles plus Technical Framework Maintenance
• Profile proposals
  • Pre Procedure Document option for CATH Workflow
    • Some of the CDA implementation Guides (eg CCD and History and Physical) will be part of Meaningful Use Stage 2 requirements, therefore it is important to add this information to Cath Workflow
  • Cath Report Content
    • ACC is writing a health policy statement for Cath Lab data (similiar what has been done on structured reporting in cardiac imaging)
    • There is a risk of not keeping these to parallel efforts in syng. The publication timeline for the ACC paper is most likely longer than the one for the profile
    • The consensus was to make use of the preliminary information from the ACC paper for the public comment/trial implementation version and then update the final text version according to the finalized ACC paper.
  • Cath Registry súbmission
    • based on the Cath Report Content profile. The Cath report will be used for prepopulation of the NCDR registry
    • There was some discussion with regard to the workflow, since the cath report is very different from the data captured in the lab (evidence documents versus final report).
    • Three stages: Evidence documents in the lab, final Cath Report (as defined in previous profile) and data to be submitted to registry
  • Pre-Authorization
    • Independent from any other of the CATH profiles discussed above
  • Cardiac EP Content
    • Continuation of the work started with a whitepaper last year.
    • NCDR ICD registry submission based on information in EP Lab report
    • There are some gaps in the Key Data Elements defined by HRS/ACC compared to what is needed for registry submission
    • Big interest from HRS, they want to use this to promote IHE to their membership
  • EP Lab workflow
    • build on CATH Workflow and apply it to the EP lab
    • Should be pretty straight forward after defining the EP report
  • Evidence Documents workshop
    • There are interoperability issues with local extensions to the defined measurement sets
    • Evaluation of how well these profiles are implemented
    • Should be either done by IHE Rad or Card, Cardiology has some big issues with the adoption of TID 5200
  • TF Maintenance
    • Transition to new templates defined by the Domain Coordination Committee and some cleanup for mandatory options
• Short listing of profiles
  • It was suggested to defer work on the Cath Registry Submission and the EP lab workflow, since there are dependencies on other profiles that need to be developed.
  • Remaining six profile will undergo technical analysis by the Technical Committee
  • Planning Committee needs to vote on final work items based on Effort estimates of TC by the end of November