PCCPlan Minutes 2012 10 30

From IHE Wiki
Revision as of 13:59, 30 October 2012 by Tsoutherland (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Referral Matching

Presenter: George Cole

  • 4 Basic Issues (Assumption that we are using XD*):
    • 1. Referring system doing the referral knows how to format and where to include a "ReferralId"
    • 2. Works for single or multiple submission sets
    • 3. Receiving system has to know how to handle, turn around the referral
      • using structured or unstructured document, etc
    • 4. Referring system needs to know whether or not it will receive a response, and which response it is receiving
  • Use XDS Folders, metadata content
  • Use certain pieces of CDAR2 and/or CCDA
  • Q: Isn't this XDW?
    • Could be beneficially used in XDW, but this is not about tracking tasks across enterprise, but instead narrowly focusing down on a referral use case
  • Look at Perinatal Workflow and ensure alignment
  • Keith:
    • Agree that material is there, and this will be helpful to explain how to use it.
    • Will be challenges when dealing with unstructured documents
      • George: use XD* metadata to help deal with this
      • Keith: There is no searching capability within XDS metadata
      • Should schedule joint time with ITI during Dec meeting
  • John D:
    • Is this a Transition of Care XDW component?
      • It could become that, a component of XDW
    • Is selection of the referral target out of scope, or pre-condition?
      • yes, either approach. not trying to profile this.
  • Wendy S:
    • Are we restricting the idea to only using XDS?
      • Will use XDS, XDM, XDR - XD*
    • Can this be used outside of XD*?
      • the piece of this that profiles CDA content could be used outside of XD*
  • Keith:
    • Is unstructured document going to be used to request a referral?
      • we could say unstructured document is off the table...otherwise will be challenges tracking
  • Tone - Need to ensure we don't let this profile expand outside of original scope

Order Matching

Presenter: Emma Jones

  • Can be meds, or any type of order such as a "wound assessment"
  • One of the challenges may be that the communication is about a particular order, but not necessarily a fullfillment of a given order
  • Order for referral vs diagnostic study is the same
  • committee agrees to combine this with referral matching, to be approached as one profile

Care Management Revision

Presenter: Keith Boone

  • Coordinate w/HL7 Patient Care
  • Need to consider other related profiles (RCG, RCK, etc)
  • Perhaps this is a harmonization or white paper effort
  • Concerns w/overlap or competition with current US initiatives (S&I Framework)


Diagnostic Study Request

Presenter: Vincent van Pelt

  • Is this work already addressed elsewhere in IHE?
    • Perhaps eReferral Workflow
  • Scheduling piece is not addressed here..concerns with trying to tackle that
    • Scheduled component is very lightweight here
  • Other Workflow profiles being put forward may have overlap here - XDW-EHDI in particular
  • Can this be broadened to "Order request"?
    • Yes, ok so what are the challenges with this approach
    • Consider the concepts presented in State Chart XML http://www.w3.org/TR/scxml/
    • Types of orders that this can also address:
      • Standing/Repeating
  • Need to ensure we stay focused on the clinical aspects of this, and not get into Payer models, etc.
  • No stakeholders as of yet
    • Ideas for Profile rename
      • Plan of Care Orders
      • Order, Procedure Order
      • Test Order


IC CCDA Harmonization

Presenter: Alean Kirnak



C-CDA Harmonization

  • concerns:
    • C-CDA is US-specific
      • Complete gap analysis showing US specific aspects of C-CCDA
      • Change PCC templates such that they harmonize w/C-CDA but exclude US specific aspects as mentioned above
    • XDS-MS, XPHR, EDR, IC (voted in, but not part of the TF yet) are all Final Text
    • Problems and Allergies templates are biggest challenge - breaking changes were made to these templates in C-CDA
    • Template Versioning
      • Currently PCC just creates new templateIds, not a new version of existing template
      • use root and extension
    • PCC should focus on schema and rule changes - not changing templateIds
    • Both short and long term interests - how do we fix it now so that PCC is not competing with C-CDA and how do we handle for new templates going forward
    • Possible Solutions:
      • 1.Introduce new profiles that deprecate existing profiles (e.g. XDS.b over XDS.a)
      • 2.Write CPs


  • Areas of Work:
    • 1.Gap Analysis of US Specifics
    • 2.Template Versioning