Difference between revisions of "AP Domain Minutes 13November2012"

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "==DRAFT== ==Attending== Colin Murphy [mailto:colin.murphy@mtutive.com colin.murphy@mtutive.com]; Mary Kennedy [mailto:mkenned@cap.org mkenned@cap.org]; Mike Henderson [mailto:mi...")
 
Line 6: Line 6:
  
  
−
==Minutes==
+
==MINUTES==
  
−
# Agenda Review
+
# '''Agenda Review'''
−
# Discussion on “Integrated Lab Workflow” proposal by Harry
+
# '''IHE AP Report'''
−
## Overlap between this profile and other proposal so need to consolidate to single proposal
+
## The report will be sent to Chris to put on domain once it is completed.
−
## Same basic workflow as laboratory workflow
+
## Vendors have not implemented yet in France….. very few vendors in the French market for anatomic pathology
−
## Combination of APW + lab device automation + lab analytic workflow profiles so that can manage devices and systems using HL7 or DICOM workflow; also use a common approach
+
##There are some in Spain.
−
## LAW Profile doesn’t support bulk data results (such as images or genetic analyses); only supports results going back to LIS in OUL message
+
##French vendors will have to implement. APFR will be required.
−
## Instead of sending back results, send back reference pointer and the results kept elsewhere
+
##There is a national project of care coordination around cancer cases which is driven by ___ organization and the National Cancer institute in France.
−
## Group discussed other open issues (listed on wiki page)
+
##Presently working on the Tumor Board Report.
−
### Additional flag should be added in OUL to note reference pointer; whether it is stored in a readily accessible format or not
+
##Implementation should begin in 2013.
−
### Not intended to deal with reporting
+
##…………..is working to update the implementation guide with 10 additional ……………so that the guide follows the medical specification of National ……………Institute.
−
### The LIS is not intended to store items long term such as genetic information (not big enough for all this info)
+
# '''Status of IHE–IPALM Joint Initiative (Encoding Breast Cancer APSR)'''
−
## Next steps: AP Domain needs to decide which proposal will move forward
+
##''The feedback from the face-to-face meeting in Stockholm is scheduled to occur this Friday, November 16, 2012 at 8:00AM in the teleconference for ICD11.''
−
# IPaLM
+
##Comments on staging will be discussed.
−
## IHE AP will send their breast cancer structured report to IPaLM including the PathLex codes; discuss using the codes in this document
+
##Raj will be able to provide feedback after this Friday.
−
### IHE AP send the structured report template + any specific questions to Raj Dash and IPaLM will fill in any missing pieces at the F2F meeting; idea is that IPaLM will provide some rules for completing the template
+
##Email questions and concerns to Raj and he will share will submit for group discussion on Friday.
−
### Coding the specimen type and histologic types is the top priority
+
##A concern about the rational of not taking all the details of the T&M was voiced. Is it mainly for intellectual property issues or for simplification?
−
### IHE AP will attend the F2F meeting as they are able-Mary will post call in information on the wiki
+
##There is opportunity in a single code to capture some epidemiologic data. It would be very difficult to capture all the T&M details in a single code with the code space that is available to ICD11. It is possible with the second code to provide more granular information.
−
## IPaLM will create a standard process of communication with IHE AP
+
##Mary will post to IHE AP site all the documents sent by Raj summarizing where ICD11 is going.
−
## LOINC and SNOMED CT are going to start being mapped to the other; ICD11 codes are available for anyone to use but they are still in development
+
##A question was posed about whether there is a terms of reference document for ICD11. What is considered within the scope of what they are trying to do in ICD11?
 +
##Raj will get the document and share. He will also find out if IHE can have access to draft of ICD11 to provide comments.
 +
##IPALM next step: submit questions to INI Chair.
 +
##Mary will put together questions for INI and post IPALM presentation on IHE.
 +
# '''''''''Status of ICCR '''
 +
##Will work on nephrology/urology/pathology
 +
##Have contact with Spain, Italy, France, Switzerland, and New Zealand
 +
##Have connection with….UICC
 +
##It is not clear how IHE can be involved.
 +
##There is no discussion regarding any kind of technology implementation of this at this point – IHE may bring to group.
 +
##Mary will find out more information - regarding discrepancy between……she will also invite John Quigley or K. Washington from the CAP Cancer Committee to join in on the next call.
 +
##International templates: IHE should push the adoption of International models.

Revision as of 11:01, 16 November 2012

DRAFT

Attending

Colin Murphy colin.murphy@mtutive.com; Mary Kennedy mkenned@cap.org; Mike Henderson mike@easterninformatics.com; Hugh Glover hugh_glover@bluewaveinformatics.co.uk; Harry Solomon harry.solomon@ge.com; Alessandro Sulis asulis@crs4.it; Raj Dash r.dash@duke.edu


MINUTES

  1. Agenda Review
  2. IHE AP Report
    1. The report will be sent to Chris to put on domain once it is completed.
    2. Vendors have not implemented yet in France….. very few vendors in the French market for anatomic pathology
    3. There are some in Spain.
    4. French vendors will have to implement. APFR will be required.
    5. There is a national project of care coordination around cancer cases which is driven by ___ organization and the National Cancer institute in France.
    6. Presently working on the Tumor Board Report.
    7. Implementation should begin in 2013.
    8. …………..is working to update the implementation guide with 10 additional ……………so that the guide follows the medical specification of National ……………Institute.
  3. Status of IHE–IPALM Joint Initiative (Encoding Breast Cancer APSR)
    1. The feedback from the face-to-face meeting in Stockholm is scheduled to occur this Friday, November 16, 2012 at 8:00AM in the teleconference for ICD11.
    2. Comments on staging will be discussed.
    3. Raj will be able to provide feedback after this Friday.
    4. Email questions and concerns to Raj and he will share will submit for group discussion on Friday.
    5. A concern about the rational of not taking all the details of the T&M was voiced. Is it mainly for intellectual property issues or for simplification?
    6. There is opportunity in a single code to capture some epidemiologic data. It would be very difficult to capture all the T&M details in a single code with the code space that is available to ICD11. It is possible with the second code to provide more granular information.
    7. Mary will post to IHE AP site all the documents sent by Raj summarizing where ICD11 is going.
    8. A question was posed about whether there is a terms of reference document for ICD11. What is considered within the scope of what they are trying to do in ICD11?
    9. Raj will get the document and share. He will also find out if IHE can have access to draft of ICD11 to provide comments.
    10. IPALM next step: submit questions to INI Chair.
    11. Mary will put together questions for INI and post IPALM presentation on IHE.
  4. ''''Status of ICCR
    1. Will work on nephrology/urology/pathology
    2. Have contact with Spain, Italy, France, Switzerland, and New Zealand
    3. Have connection with….UICC
    4. It is not clear how IHE can be involved.
    5. There is no discussion regarding any kind of technology implementation of this at this point – IHE may bring to group.
    6. Mary will find out more information - regarding discrepancy between……she will also invite John Quigley or K. Washington from the CAP Cancer Committee to join in on the next call.
    7. International templates: IHE should push the adoption of International models.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=AP_Domain_Minutes_13November2012&oldid=64406"