Lab Conf Minutes 18March2014

From IHE Wiki
Revision as of 13:59, 30 April 2014 by Skrejci (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to IHE Laboratory Domain

Back to IHE Laboratory Technical Committee Page


    Attendees

  • Francois Macary (ASIP Santé, technical cochair),
  • Riki Merrick (Vernetzt, contractor to APHL, planning cochair)
  • Mary Kennedy (CAP, secretary)
  • Joannna Selinsky (??)
  • Rob Bush (Orchard Software)
  • Sabrina Krejci (CAP)
  • Carolyn Knapik (CAP) – has lab background, is new to lab Committee, but not to CAP
  • Juergen De Decker (MIPS)
  • Filip Migom (MIPS)
  • Laurent Lardin (bioMerieux)
  • Ed Heierman (ABBOTT, CTO of IICC)
  • Dmytro Rud (Roche)
  • James M Wulkan (Beckman Coulter)
  • Jim Harrison (Viginia University, CAP)
  • Daniel Moncusi (SYSTELAB

 

 

Minutes

Review of the proposed changes to LAW, led by Ed (sound) supported by Riki (image) … Very persuasive team.

3 of the 6 prepared word documents were reviewed. All 6 are available from:

<a href="http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Laboratory_Analytical_Workflow#LAW_v1.3_Proposed_Changes" target="_blank">http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Laboratory_Analytical_Workflow#LAW_v1.3_Proposed_Changes</a>

Evolution in the management of field lengths

  • Pre-adopt v2.7 conformance rules
  • No more length for composite data type, rather define only the primitive data types in the subcomponents
  • Normative length rules – no truncation, but if an existing system cannot support the normative length for a field – need to send error messages identifying which fields a system cannot support the length constraints
  • Conformance length without truncation – for identifiers – also needs to create error message, if length cannot be supported – so we will need to agree on a lengths for these fields – minimize impact on existing systems
  • Conformance length with truncation – also agree on conformance lengths (CL)– can truncate above the conformance length – if a system can support longer than conformance length, can take un-truncated
  • Still need to generate error, if under the conformance lengths
  • Page 3 and 4 have the fields that should be considered for no-truncation CL
  • SAC and others using barcode may be reduced from 50= this would need to be reviewed
  • ACTION: For feedback on the documents – suggest to upload the documents with embedded comments – prefer to also list comments on the wiki

Additional Comment : Francois likes the direction, leveraging the later standard enhancements from later versions – also done in US realm IGs

 

Standardized image for graphs.

  • Needed for hematology domain – could provide standardization around the images for the graphs rather than the individual points to be re-constructed- Orchard has provided some input as well as Beckman Coulter
  • Questions? What is the basis to specify the resolution – why not include resolution and display size in the met data?
  • On manager size need to display the images, which may require dynamic display, and with non-rasterised image uses you lose readability of the chart – so standardizing on easy rules should help alleviate
  • Image size often associated with data content – should not be too difficult to deal with on receiver end, but some pre-determined display may be helpful
  • If a standard for transmitting figures is set up – structure of the message to carry multiple sizes to be accommodated in the messaging aspect while providing suggested preferred value
  • When the image is large enough – use RP for those
  • ACTION: Check with radiology message for metadata transmission – next step is to write up as true CP

OBR and TCD Fields

  • Out of these discussions pointed to other segments we support in the messages and that generated discussion about additional TCD fields that could be used
  • Added discussion points from Siemens and Roche
  • Additional TCD-9 to TCD-11 should be OO proposal first
  • Update TCD-2 to allow dilution factors
  • Added new document with HL7 proposal
  • Close gap on OBR field suggestions from Beckman Coulter

 

Housekeeping & Announcements

Call for proposals went out – deadline to submit is 3/31/2014:

Suggested proposals – will send reminder to google groups

  • “LDA release 2” from John Hopson (Abbott) – Ed will follow up with John
  • LOI/LRI/eDOS harmonization with IHE profiles from Riki

 

May 12-14, 2014 Paris France Face to Face Meeting Agenda

Francois has drafted the agenda for Face to Face – is available on wiki: <a href="http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=LAB_F2F_Paris_May2014">http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=LAB_F2F_Paris_May2014</a>


Send suggestions to Francois via email <a href="mailto:francois.macary@sante.gouv.fr">francois.macary@sante.gouv.fr</a>

 

Next Call

April 08, 2014 11:00AM ET/ 10:00AM Central

  • 5 to 10 minutes for an update on LCC if Jim is available, so we know better what will be done on LCC during face to face meeting. (I remember there is a feedback awaited from Austin Kreisler, and a Change Request to be posted by Jim to OO)
  • 40 to 45 minutes on LAW if Ed wants to.