Difference between revisions of "PCD Cochairs 2009-08-11 Webex"

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (→‎Proposed Agenda: add item to agenda from last week's meeting)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
== Proposed Agenda ==  
 
== Proposed Agenda ==  
 +
From 2009.08.11 Early A.M. E-mail Chat...
 +
:* AAMI 2010 Proposal?
 +
:* AAMI IT Horizons Article?
 +
:* AAMI Discussion Update - today's threads and potential monthly meetings
 +
:* Profile Info to Steve Moore...
 +
:* TI Final Versions to Lisa - send now?
 +
:* Process for Public Comment Resolution - needed? - see below
 +
:* PCD ... Model...
 +
 
''' Copied from August 4 meeting with some updates'''
 
''' Copied from August 4 meeting with some updates'''
 
:1. Review & Approve Agenda
 
:1. Review & Approve Agenda
 
:2. Review [[PCD_Cochairs_2009-08-04_Webex | previous Discussion Summary from 2009.08.04]]  
 
:2. Review [[PCD_Cochairs_2009-08-04_Webex | previous Discussion Summary from 2009.08.04]]  
−
:3. Fall F2F high level schedule
+
:3. Visibility of options, profiles (e.g., RTM, WCM) with Steve Moore
−
:4. Ballot updates
+
:4. Integrating IDCO WG (Google Groups, meeting list, Wiki pages with discussion summary, etc.)
−
:5. AAMI Conference 2010
+
:5. Fall F2F high level schedule
 +
:6. Ballot updates
 +
::- Process including need for ballot on TI after public comment (not CPs --> TI)
 +
:7. AAMI Conference 2010
 
::- Update
 
::- Update
 
::- Recruiting - webinars?
 
::- Recruiting - webinars?
−
:6. PCD Strategic Plan (f/u to Tcons)
+
:8. PCD Strategic Plan (f/u to Tcons)
−
:7. Profile and CP Updates:
+
:9. Profile and CP Updates:
 +
::- DEC PIB (2 options - PAM, PDQ?)
 
::- IDCO Profile status
 
::- IDCO Profile status
 
::- MEM-RTLS breakout
 
::- MEM-RTLS breakout
 
::- Other work items
 
::- Other work items
−
:8. New Action Item (__ )
+
:10. New Action Item on list
−
:9. IHE PCD - Asia
+
:11. IHE PCD - Asia
 
::- IHE-J PCD Support
 
::- IHE-J PCD Support
 
::- [[http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Asia-Oceania | IHE Asia-Oceania 2010 Connectathon / Showcase]]
 
::- [[http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=Asia-Oceania | IHE Asia-Oceania 2010 Connectathon / Showcase]]
−
:10. Connectathon Update
+
:12. Connectathon Update
−
:11. Showcase Update
+
:13. Showcase Update
−
:12. Funding Status update
+
:14. Funding Status update
 
::- Letter to ACCE
 
::- Letter to ACCE
 
::- Proposal from Jennifer
 
::- Proposal from Jennifer
Line 45: Line 58:
  
 
== Attachments / Materials ==
 
== Attachments / Materials ==
−
'''Needs updating'''
 
−
 
−
'''updated with discussion of July 21, 2009,  [[PCD Cochairs 2009-07-21 Webex]] '''
 
−
 
−
 
−
'' Action Items Brought Forward ''
 
−
 
−
:{|border="2"
 
−
|-
 
−
! width="5%"  align="center" |Number
 
−
! width="20%"  align="left"  |Action
 
−
! width="7%"  align="left"  |Owner
 
−
! width="7%"  align="left"  |Participants
 
−
! width="7%"  align="left"  |Due Date
 
−
! width="5%"  align="left"  |Status
 
−
!              align="left"  |Comments
 
−
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 55
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Showcase vendor display policy
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Steve Merritt
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' | Ray, Elliot
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | September 29, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | Will add to Domain Process (management) document. Issues may exist with third party devices brought by Cerner and Capsule this year. Will include: Chris Carr, Didi direction on bi-directional distributed demo, display/demonstration of ancillary equipment. Todd’s draft will be the basis for Steve’s efforts. Change due date until the end of September, with the idea that portions would be ready for the F2F and others would depend upon the Showcase.
 
  
 +
See [[PCD Cochair Action Items]] page.
  
−
|-
+
Significant changes, other than dates, will be in bold.
−
| align="center" | 74
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Clinical Recruitment
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Steve
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' | Cochairs and PC
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | Open
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | 
 
−
Carolyn McGregor spoke with Elliot and she is interested in participating. Her interest is largely in data warehousing, and this would be a contribution to PCD. See previous meeting for more information.  Monroe and Todd presented at the Canadian EMB meeting. '''Manny to ask Elliot if he has heard from Carolyn McGregor.'''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 77
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Monitor HITSP development of RMON and coordinate a demonstration with HITSP.
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Todd
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' | Paul
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | July 7, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | For earlier discussion summary see meeting of May 12. Todd plans to prepare materials to call attention to medical device communications within the revisions underway. Paul noted that PCC domain may look at sending graphical segments in RMON. Paul responded to PCC by sending information on his concept for sending short segments. The approach they are currently considering won’t work for PCD. Todd summarized yesterday’s meeting:
 
−
:- Device connectivity for acute care devices had been postponed until mid-July.
 
−
:- Todd asked John Halamka and learned that it is not clear if device connectivity is part of “meaningful use”.
 
−
:- CCHIT’s contract runs out in mid-November, so PCD’s interest in certification is up in the air.
 
−
:- Todd reviewed several presentations from the meeting.
 
−
::o Among next steps include determining what, if any of the original 2009 work will remain a priority for ONC.
 
−
::o He recommended PCD provide a position paper showing how the PCD relates to the original 2009 priorities.
 
−
::o Tiger team reports – the architectural team has provided a detailed description.
 
−
:- Todd recommended a 10-15 page paper to describe the need for device connectivity to be part of the roadmap.
 
−
::o There is a real chance that device connectivity won’t be a priority.
 
−
::o Todd will talk with Elliot to learn if the position paper is worthwhile and noted that this is required by the end of the month. He believes this is now straight forward based upon recent HITSP’s work.
 
−
:- ONC’s contract for HITSP is up for bid and it may not be ANSI.
 
−
: June 16: Todd and Paul will provide a draft message for Joyce and Lisa to send to HITSP informing them of WAN progress with Continua. See summary of PCD/Continua update below.
 
−
Todd will speak with Joyce about whether a letter to HITSP referring to RMON and ARRA "meaningful use" would be helpful. Steve noted that the ''meainingful use'' definition projects 2015 for personal health record becoming an element of the definition.
 
−
: Meaningful Use: Todd sent response. He recommended that the timetable restore the date to 2011 rather than 2015, and included the rationale.
 
−
Todd also sent Joyce a proposal for a new tiger team for medical device connectivity. '''Todd expressed disappointment in the low priority given to device connectivity, noting that some of the earlier, higher priority items require device profiles.'''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 78
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Continua
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | John
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' | Paul
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | April 15, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | See May 12 meeting for earlier discussions. There’s been no opportunity to resolve apparent differences by June for HITSP. Paul said there’s been no movement on RMON in Continua. IBM is promoting web services and ASN1. It’s not likely that Continua and PCD will arrive at a single protocol by June. The positive side is that both will use RTM. One question is whether they can support complex devices such as ventilators, infusion pumps. RMON F2F takes place the week after F2F at NIST. Paul asked if anyone can join him at the Continua F2F June 8 or 9. That will precede a June Continua ballot. Ken and John are unable to attend. Ken was on a call with Continua this morning. On the call Paul provided a half hour recommendation that Continua use PCD-01. Continua is planning to use a hub and they may be open to multiple alternatives. Continua WAN Meeting Update – Paul reported that his presentation was well received and that the Continua TC is giving serious consideration to PCD-01 among several alternatives. One question is frequently raised – can CDA v3 be used? While CDA requires a larger message, this question is raised in the context of web services. Paul suggested that a light weight transport or a separation between web services discovery and communication of the message may provide a compromise. June 16: Paul is working with Continua and Continua is seriously considering PCD-01 along with web services. Todd noted this collaboration can lead to other work within and benefitting IHE (closing gaps). A decision should come out of Continua's Vancouver meeting in July. As noted above (#77) an update will be sent to HITSP. Paul reported things continue to look good. Assuming a positive outcome: Security remains to be addressed. PCD-01 is moving to final text and will need to accommodate the home gateway. Continua and PCD will need to work together, agree to the effort and result for mapping to PCD-01. PCD would likely be responsible for the validation process including RTM and RHM (hierarchy). When the parameter is unique the message will not require OBXs (20601 protocol).
 
−
'''Continua continues to evaluate PCD-01 and web services. Assuming a positive outcome, Todd and Paul observed that we will need
 
−
:: (1) an official announcement, and then a jointly authored letter (with PCD) to J. Halamka, HITSP, e.g., a one page letter, and
 
−
:: (2) a public concept document to share with PCD TC.
 
−
:: (3) A joint WG will have many technical details to address to yield an implementable solution. '''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 82
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | PCD to develop MOU with CIMIT
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Ray
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' | Ken
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | April 15, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | Defer interest in year ‘round lab. Ken wrote and discussed a draft MOU intended to enable coordinating profiles, similar to the Continua MOU. Ray There’s a question regarding where in the continuum PCD should have an MOU (ICE, MDPnP, CIMIT). MOU draft was sent to Julian Goldman. Paul indicated that an interface engine solution (e.g., Capsule) may meet the needs for bidirectional communication, or connection to the device may need to be more “intimate”. Nothing new re CIMIT or ASTM MOU. Open new item for ASTM MOU. Remove from the PC if it is there.'''Ken will ask Julian when he attends the ICE-PAC workshop at CIMIT later this month.'''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 83
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Funding Possibilities
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Cochairs
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' |
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | 2009.05.26
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  |
 
−
: See May 12, 19 Action Item list for earlier notes, including previous discussions about AHRQ.
 
−
: Ray will contact AAMI to explore their sponsorship of PCD. The Heart Rhythm Society’s (HRS’s) application to join IHE did not include funds to support IDCO. 
 
−
: Lisa and HIMSS are supportive of PCD finding additional sponsorship. Ray will attempt to set an appointment with Mary at AAMI during the AAMI meeting. The cochairs began discussing the business case that might be offered. Manny briefly summarized the current state of the HIMSS budget, noting that HIMSS is unable to provide the significant increase in funding PCD requires, in particular funding for a portion of Todd's time. Lisa will defend the budget this week. Touching base with AHRQ – end of May, early June. Change date to May 26. Ray will speak with Mary before she talks with Steve Lieber. '''Talks continue with HIMSS and AAMI.'''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 87
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Recruit Vendors for Cycle 4 and HIMSS10
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Manny, ACM and MEM leaders (John, Monroe, Steve)
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' |
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | July 7, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | Manny to call a few vendors and then follow up with cochairs to set up webinars if appropriate. Masimo and Spacelabs have confirmed their commitments. Tom Schultz and Nick Steblay indicated that as many as four companies have expressed interest in receiving the IDCO messages. Manny spoke with a number of vendors in the AAMI exhibit hall and has coordinated recruiting with Steve for MEM and will do so with Monroe and John for ACM. He suggested PCD provide webinars to recruit, orient new participants, and one for Verizon. Manny to seek an orientation / orientations for this cycle: one for newcomers, one for all (review existing work, profiles, dates). Establish one for Verizon. '''Manny to seek an orientation / orientations for this cycle: one for newcomers, one for all (review existing work, profiles, dates). Establish one for Verizon. Todd has spoken with Stryker about becoming directly involved and with Roche (insulin pump). Manny will talk with Ascom. Manny to follow up with Verizon and Masimo. Ken will present at Tim Gee’s connectivity meeting. '''
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 88
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Cycle 4 Status
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | All
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' |
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | June 2, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | Cycle 4: WCM anticipates a series of decisions with serious discussion. WCM is several months away. Implementation for a New Directions demonstration is feasible. Other Developments: ACM – Monroe is attempting to recruit vendors for the AM-AC links; DPI WP – Todd is proceeding to lead its development; MEM WP – Steve is making progress with this group. IDCO votes are overwhelmingly in favor of release. Manny will check on voting eligibility. ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Patient_Care_Devices/Profiles/IDCO/IHE_PCD_TF_Supplement_IDCO_2009-06.doc. The Profile / White Paper list was updated and will be sent to Lisa. Other items on the list: WCM ready in the Fall, as part of next cycle; PIV mid-June, for this cycle; RTM next week sometime – it will be an update to the previously published version (last year) with lots of additional items in the tables; it is provided with Change Tracking; DPI August 1, White Paper; MEM mid-July, White Paper. IDCO is out for public comment.
 
−
- PIV – Todd is working to have PIV updates ready for TC ballot and then public comment release. There are a number of issues that need to be resolved.
 
−
o IHE will be asked whether Enhanced ACK is required or only popular - an issue that needs to be resolved.
 
−
:Steve indicated a need to separate RTLS from MEM in order to collaborate with vendors who are not interested in other aspects of MEM. This will become a new profile proposal arising from discussions with vendors.
 
−
:'''IDCO - Paul reported that they have reviewed and developed responses to the public comments. The next step is a ballot to move this to the TI version. '''
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 89
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | Stakeholder Survey
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Ray, Manny
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' |
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | June 2, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  | Ray and Manny updated the survey questions and sent it for PCD review. Ken reminded the group that one response was received. Manny will discuss with Ray when he returns from vacation. Following the review Ray will submit to HIMSS Analytics. Close the old (#61)and open new item with date of early June to send to HIMSS. Manny to ask Ray to submit the survey to HIMSS.'''Ray submitted the survey to HIMSS.'''
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 90
 
−
| '''<Action Item>''' | ASTM MOU
 
−
| '''<Owner>:'''  | Ken
 
−
| '''<Participants>''' |
 
−
| '''<Due Date>'''  | June 2, 2009
 
−
| '''<Status>''' | OPEN
 
−
| '''<Comments>:'''  |
 
−
 
 
−
 
 
−
|}
 
  
 
== Meeting Summary ==
 
== Meeting Summary ==
Line 189: Line 67:
  
 
=== Participants ===
 
=== Participants ===
−
'''Placeholder'''
+
 
−
: Cochairs: Todd Cooper, Steve Merritt, John Rhoads,
+
: Cochairs: Todd Cooper, Steve Merritt, John Rhoads
 
: Meeting Chaired by: Todd
 
: Meeting Chaired by: Todd
−
: Guest: Paul Schluter
 
 
: Technical Project Manager: Manny Furst
 
: Technical Project Manager: Manny Furst
  
Line 215: Line 92:
 
| '''Review Meeting Summaries''' <br>- Chair
 
| '''Review Meeting Summaries''' <br>- Chair
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
−
: '''Placeholder''' No changes were requested.
+
: No changes were requested.
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Action(s):'''
 
'''Action(s):'''
Line 225: Line 102:
  
 
:* 55: Showcase Vendor Display Policy -  
 
:* 55: Showcase Vendor Display Policy -  
−
:* 61: Stakeholder survey -
 
 
:* 74: Clinician recruitment -  
 
:* 74: Clinician recruitment -  
 
:* 77: HITSP RMON -  
 
:* 77: HITSP RMON -  
Line 235: Line 111:
 
:* 89: Stakeholder Survey -  
 
:* 89: Stakeholder Survey -  
 
:* 90: ASTM MOU -  
 
:* 90: ASTM MOU -  
−
:* 91:  
+
:* 91: High-Level Architecture -
 +
:* 92: TF Revision -
 +
:* 93: V&V & IHE -
  
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
Line 254: Line 132:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| align="center" | 5
 
| align="center" | 5
−
| '''Fall F2F''' <br>- Manny
+
| '''Agenda Items''' <br>- Manny
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 +
:* Todd spoke with Jill re AAMI IT Horizons issue and offered several potential topics. John suggested that patient safety would provide a way to talk about several PCD efforts, including work with ICE-PAC. The article is due the end of the month and will include an IHE and PCD overview. Todd is also working on an updating ISO 80001 article in the same issue. John Rhoads will work with Todd on this article.
 +
:* AAMI representation to PCD – approach AAMI after the Aug. 21 meeting – Todd and/or Ray to make specific suggestion.
 
:*  
 
:*  
 +
:*
 +
:*
 +
:*
 +
:1. Above
 +
:2. Above
 +
:3.
 +
:4. Todd suggested that the discussion item 4 (when to use DEC or ACM) should be addressed elsewhere. Steve suggested a joint PC, TC meeting – on the 19th for this and other issues about profile usage. E.g., What makes a separate profile and related issues of visibility and testing? This will replace the regular PC meeting.
 +
:5. F2F: Steve will update and email group as a step to developing the schedule.
 +
:6.
 +
:7.
 +
:8.
 +
:9. Integrating IDCO into Wiki and other PCD processes. Manny to contact Nick and Tom to resolve. A reasonable period of time might be 4 to 6 weeks.
 +
:10.
 +
:11.
 +
:12.
 +
  
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
Line 267: Line 163:
 
| '''Profile Update Detail''' <br>- Todd
 
| '''Profile Update Detail''' <br>- Todd
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
−
:*  
+
:* Release of TI versions to Lisa for editing then approval and transmittal to Steve Moore: PCD needs to move to minimum device semantics, in volume three, for RTM. For Kudu we’ll test conformance within other tests, static tests. For this year RTM is required unless we cannot get an automated test in place. Going forward the requirement for RTM will be incorporated in each appropriate profile document with a link to the latest table.
 +
:* DEC needs to be updated with the PIV CPs. John Rhoads will do this.
 +
:* Steve Merritt will address the RTM issues in the user guideline document. Discussion followed about how to assure that DEC and other profiles are using RTM and the latest versions of RTM. John said conformance statements should include statements about the dates of  the Connectathon and Profiles.
 +
:* Process for releasing TI: Following resolution of the public comments - John’s process includes the PCD ballot if there are substantial changes, otherwise the ballot is not necessary. The group can make that decision after discussion of the resolution of comments.
 +
 
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
  
Line 276: Line 176:
 
| '''Announcements''' <br>- All
 
| '''Announcements''' <br>- All
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
−
:*  
+
:* HIMSS Survey – share with cochairs and check with Ray
  
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
Line 286: Line 186:
 
|-
 
|-
 
| align="center" | 8
 
| align="center" | 8
−
| '''xyz''' <br>- <lead>
+
| '''Connectathon''' <br>- <lead>
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
−
:* ...
+
:* Steve Moore joined to discuss testing, capturing results and how to handle options:
−
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
+
Currently reporting process does not id options that were tested. This will be addressed later when tools are available to track and report testing of options. Vendors can report themselves. For PCD, we can have a discussion with Lisa, Steve Moore, PCD cochairs regarding how to manage this testing and reporting. Integration statements can be written by vendors to include options – without testing anything. Todd suggested that PCD’s user guide can address this. Steve Moore noted that this should be described in volume 1 of the TF documents. He noted that RTM doesn’t describe this – whether as a profile or option, and can provide multiple ways this may be used if necessary. PCD can do this manually for the time being and will be incorporated in test outcome recording next year. We can do something this year within Kudu. Then this can be published. PCD needs to provide details for Steve. We will do this over the next week or two. Manny to schedule a meeting with Lisa, Steve and the cochairs.
−
:*  
+
:* Steve addressed the question of what constitutes a profile? This requires identifying actors. RTM, for example, can be written as a profile specifying how it is used in DEC, etc. Or it can be an option within profiles. The decision is PCD’s.
−
 
+
:* Using Kudu for New Directions has the advantage for scheduling, but is more complex. Steve Moore is comfortable either way.
−
'''Action(s):'''
 
−
:*  
 
  
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | 9
 
−
| '''xyz''' <br>- <lead>
 
−
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
−
:* ...
 
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
−
:*
 
  
 
'''Action(s):'''
 
'''Action(s):'''
−
:*
 
−
 
−
|-
 
−
| align="center" | n
 
−
| '''Next Meeting''' <br>- Chair
 
−
| '''Status/Discussion:'''
 
−
'''Decisions/Issues:'''
 
  
−
'''Action(s):'''
 
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 322: Line 206:
  
 
[[Patient Care Device | PCD Home]]
 
[[Patient Care Device | PCD Home]]
−
[[Category:PCD Meeting]]
+
[[Category:PCD Meeting Archive]]

Latest revision as of 14:26, 17 May 2010

Patient Care Device Cochairs Weekly Meeting

Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Time: 3:00 pm, Eastern Time

Duration: 60 Minutes

Proposed Agenda

From 2009.08.11 Early A.M. E-mail Chat...

  • AAMI 2010 Proposal?
  • AAMI IT Horizons Article?
  • AAMI Discussion Update - today's threads and potential monthly meetings
  • Profile Info to Steve Moore...
  • TI Final Versions to Lisa - send now?
  • Process for Public Comment Resolution - needed? - see below
  • PCD ... Model...

Copied from August 4 meeting with some updates

1. Review & Approve Agenda
2. Review previous Discussion Summary from 2009.08.04
3. Visibility of options, profiles (e.g., RTM, WCM) with Steve Moore
4. Integrating IDCO WG (Google Groups, meeting list, Wiki pages with discussion summary, etc.)
5. Fall F2F high level schedule
6. Ballot updates
- Process including need for ballot on TI after public comment (not CPs --> TI)
7. AAMI Conference 2010
- Update
- Recruiting - webinars?
8. PCD Strategic Plan (f/u to Tcons)
9. Profile and CP Updates:
- DEC PIB (2 options - PAM, PDQ?)
- IDCO Profile status
- MEM-RTLS breakout
- Other work items
10. New Action Item on list
11. IHE PCD - Asia
- IHE-J PCD Support
- [| IHE Asia-Oceania 2010 Connectathon / Showcase]
12. Connectathon Update
13. Showcase Update
14. Funding Status update
- Letter to ACCE
- Proposal from Jennifer
- Other opportunities / updates
13. Continua-IHE PCD WAN SDE#2 Meeting Update
- IHE Support for HL7 v2 ER messages using WS*
14. HITSP ARRA/HITECH Status Update
15. IHE International
- Incorporation Status
- IP Management Process
- Draft Disclosure Process
- Draft Disclosure Form
15. Action Items
16. Additional Business
- Recruiting
- Connectivity Meeting Sept.

Attachments / Materials

See PCD Cochair Action Items page.

Significant changes, other than dates, will be in bold.

Meeting Summary

Participants

Cochairs: Todd Cooper, Steve Merritt, John Rhoads
Meeting Chaired by: Todd
Technical Project Manager: Manny Furst

Discussion

Item Topic Discussion
1 Introductions & Agenda Review
- Chair 		Status/Discussion:

Decisions/Issues:

Accepted

Action(s):

2 Review Meeting Summaries
- Chair 		Status/Discussion:
No changes were requested.

Decisions/Issues: Action(s):

3 Action Items Review
- Chair 		Status/Discussion:
  • 55: Showcase Vendor Display Policy -
  • 74: Clinician recruitment -
  • 77: HITSP RMON -
  • 78: Continua -
  • 82: CIMIT -
  • 83: Funding Possibilities -
  • 87: Recruiting Vendors -
  • 88: Cycle 4 -
  • 89: Stakeholder Survey -
  • 90: ASTM MOU -
  • 91: High-Level Architecture -
  • 92: TF Revision -
  • 93: V&V & IHE -

Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

4 IHE International
- All 		Status/Discussion:

Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

5 Agenda Items
- Manny 		Status/Discussion:
  • Todd spoke with Jill re AAMI IT Horizons issue and offered several potential topics. John suggested that patient safety would provide a way to talk about several PCD efforts, including work with ICE-PAC. The article is due the end of the month and will include an IHE and PCD overview. Todd is also working on an updating ISO 80001 article in the same issue. John Rhoads will work with Todd on this article.
  • AAMI representation to PCD – approach AAMI after the Aug. 21 meeting – Todd and/or Ray to make specific suggestion.
1. Above
2. Above
3.
4. Todd suggested that the discussion item 4 (when to use DEC or ACM) should be addressed elsewhere. Steve suggested a joint PC, TC meeting – on the 19th for this and other issues about profile usage. E.g., What makes a separate profile and related issues of visibility and testing? This will replace the regular PC meeting.
5. F2F: Steve will update and email group as a step to developing the schedule.
6.
7.
8.
9. Integrating IDCO into Wiki and other PCD processes. Manny to contact Nick and Tom to resolve. A reasonable period of time might be 4 to 6 weeks.
10.
11.
12.


Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

6 Profile Update Detail
- Todd 		Status/Discussion:
  • Release of TI versions to Lisa for editing then approval and transmittal to Steve Moore: PCD needs to move to minimum device semantics, in volume three, for RTM. For Kudu we’ll test conformance within other tests, static tests. For this year RTM is required unless we cannot get an automated test in place. Going forward the requirement for RTM will be incorporated in each appropriate profile document with a link to the latest table.
  • DEC needs to be updated with the PIV CPs. John Rhoads will do this.
  • Steve Merritt will address the RTM issues in the user guideline document. Discussion followed about how to assure that DEC and other profiles are using RTM and the latest versions of RTM. John said conformance statements should include statements about the dates of the Connectathon and Profiles.
  • Process for releasing TI: Following resolution of the public comments - John’s process includes the PCD ballot if there are substantial changes, otherwise the ballot is not necessary. The group can make that decision after discussion of the resolution of comments.

Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

7 Announcements
- All 		Status/Discussion:
  • HIMSS Survey – share with cochairs and check with Ray

Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

8 Connectathon
- <lead> 		Status/Discussion:
  • Steve Moore joined to discuss testing, capturing results and how to handle options:

Currently reporting process does not id options that were tested. This will be addressed later when tools are available to track and report testing of options. Vendors can report themselves. For PCD, we can have a discussion with Lisa, Steve Moore, PCD cochairs regarding how to manage this testing and reporting. Integration statements can be written by vendors to include options – without testing anything. Todd suggested that PCD’s user guide can address this. Steve Moore noted that this should be described in volume 1 of the TF documents. He noted that RTM doesn’t describe this – whether as a profile or option, and can provide multiple ways this may be used if necessary. PCD can do this manually for the time being and will be incorporated in test outcome recording next year. We can do something this year within Kudu. Then this can be published. PCD needs to provide details for Steve. We will do this over the next week or two. Manny to schedule a meeting with Lisa, Steve and the cochairs.

  • Steve addressed the question of what constitutes a profile? This requires identifying actors. RTM, for example, can be written as a profile specifying how it is used in DEC, etc. Or it can be an option within profiles. The decision is PCD’s.
  • Using Kudu for New Directions has the advantage for scheduling, but is more complex. Steve Moore is comfortable either way.

Decisions/Issues:

Action(s):

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be August 18, 2009 PCD Cochairs 2009-08-18 Webex

<For Decision Meetings, add review line here when minutes are approved; e.g., "(Reviewed & approved by PCD RTM Vent TG 2008-04-16)">


PCD Home

Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=PCD_Cochairs_2009-08-11_Webex&oldid=42258"