POCUS PC Checkpoint Assessment

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Annex: PC-Prep Closing Assessment

Paste the following checklist items into the minutes; discuss and record findings for each

  • Profile Name: EBIW POCUS Extensions
  • Did we line-by-line the entire document: No
    • Need to line-by-line
      • Vol1: 2 concepts (Billing, Intermittent Connected Modalities), 3 more use cases and Data model
      • Vol2: RAD-132
  • How ready is it to go out for PC: Completely, Almost, Soonish, Hmmm: Almost
  • Which open issues are risky, and why: Identification of training studies needs to be better vetted with ACEP
  • Are all open issues phrased to solicit the needed information to close them? Yes
  • Which use cases need more input None
  • Which issues from the Kickoff Closing Assessment are still unresolved Need to finish line by line
  • What significant debates in PC-prep were not anticipated in the Kickoff
    • Revisiting whether or not to create a separate profile, and / or whether or not to create a "POCUS Encounter Manager"
    • Lots of time spent trying to get the Actor diagram into IHE format
  • Review ALL "uncertainty points" in the evaluation. Are all now resolved?
    • Packaging (profile vs EBIW extension): Resolved: after debate, TC agreed to stick with original decision to keep the POCUS Option in EBIW
    • Finalize Actors (especially organization of POCUS management functions): RESOLVED
    • Draft Transaction: Store Report (i.e., Store the POCUS procedure report. An HL7v2 ORU^R01 modeled after RAD-128): decided to incorporate ORC segments in existing RAD-132. Still needs Line-by-line
    • RAD-130: ADT mapping of HL7 Visit Number (PV1-19) to Admission ID (0038,0010) for Encounter linking as a concept: Not an Encounter Manager Requirement, but mapped in Informative Annex and included in Concept section "47.4.1.5 Obtaining Encounter Metadata"
    • R+ Physician of Record (Attending) in Visit Admission Module (DICOM cp2451): RESOLVED
    • RAD-131: R+ Physician of Record": RESOLVED
    • New Concepts: Reporting (and relation to imaging reports, clinical notes, etc.): RESOLVED
  • Review ALL "complexity points" in the evaluation. Did each get appropriate text coverage/resolution?
    • Draft Use Case: Diagnostic POCUS: Reviewed in Line-by-line
    • Decide: Finalize Actors (especially organization of POCUS management functions): Yes, Reviewed in Line-by-line
    • Draft Use Case: Non-privileged Operator Clinical and Training POCUS: Yes, Reviewed in Line-by-line
    • Decide: What mechanisms to use to Identify and segregate training studies: No, Still needs more work
    • Draft Transaction: Store Report: Extending RAD-132: No, Needs Line by Line
    • Concept: Operator Identification, Patient Identification, Modality Worklist, Supervising Physician, Discontinued Study : Yes, Reviewed in Line-by-line
    • Mapping: Attribute consistency tables (appendix) - MWL to composite, image to append (missing in EBIW?): Yes, Reviewed in Line-by-line
  • Review the "effort points" in the evaluation. Still seems right? Need more?
    • Seems right, we anticipated lots of review time
  • How does the scope feel in terms of being a useful chunk of work? (Needs more? Just right? More than enough?) More than enough
  • How is the work fitting in the allocated bandwidth? (Time to spare? Just right? Things were left undone?) Did not finish line-by-line
  • Did the Breakdown of Tasks accurately reflect the work? What extra tasks arose? No new tasks identified
  • Looking forward, if you had to reduce scope to hit TI, what would you drop Not sure, we'd need to discuss with ACEP
  • Have the promised resources manifested ACEP commitment has been strong
  • What vendors are engaged (for each actor)
    • Modality: GEHC, Canon, Philips
    • POCUS Manager: GEHC (Butterfly, SonoSite, Fuji in ACEP)
    • Encounter Manager: GEHC
    • Results Aggregator: (Epic and Cerner in ACEP Workgroup)
  • When will we have sample data/objects
    • GEHC may be able to provide some
  • Who should specifically be targeted for Public Comment feedback
    • HIMMS/SIIM AIUM, ACEP, European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care – POCUS Working Group, European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, World Organization of Family Doctors – POCUS Initiatives, European Federation of Internal Medicine (EFIM) – Ultrasound Working Group, Japan Society of Point-of-Care Ultrasound
  • Was the profile where it needed to be at the start of the PC meeting (See "PC Prep Meeting" above), if not what was the gap All sections drafted
  • Was the profile where it needed to be at the end of the PC meeting, if not what was the gap Did not finish line by line
  • How many tcons would you like between now and PC Publication 3(?)
  • Do you need any tcons before TI Prep Meeting N/A