Difference between revisions of "PCD Pump 2009-09-17 WebEx"

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 66: Line 66:
 
:''Todd to submit a proposal for this.  This will force the development of a more comprehensive model that will have a name that we can hang our hats on and identify what is mandatory and how various infusion protocols (including bolus dosing, primary / secondary, etc.) and device types are to be communicated - albeit in the abstract.  It will be a Volume 3 item, but it is TBD whether we will have it as separate Profile / Actor / Option rows in the product Integration Statements, or as e.g. an Option to DEC, which by default must have content that is conformant to the Harmonized Rosetta tables, but if we want to communicate to the end user that a given implementation also supports an I/P being used for infusion therapy / protocol X, then you need to also call out this (or related) content profiles. ''
 
:''Todd to submit a proposal for this.  This will force the development of a more comprehensive model that will have a name that we can hang our hats on and identify what is mandatory and how various infusion protocols (including bolus dosing, primary / secondary, etc.) and device types are to be communicated - albeit in the abstract.  It will be a Volume 3 item, but it is TBD whether we will have it as separate Profile / Actor / Option rows in the product Integration Statements, or as e.g. an Option to DEC, which by default must have content that is conformant to the Harmonized Rosetta tables, but if we want to communicate to the end user that a given implementation also supports an I/P being used for infusion therapy / protocol X, then you need to also call out this (or related) content profiles. ''
  
−
:''<Link to sample write-up on Bolus Dosing similar to what might be used in the Device Specialization Content Profile>''
+
:''Link to sample write-up on Bolus Dosing similar to what might be used in the Device Specialization Content Profile:''
 +
:ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Patient_Care_Devices/Devices/InfusionPumps/20090917_WebEx/Bolus_dose_mode.jpg
  
 
:* '''Event Model'''
 
:* '''Event Model'''

Revision as of 13:10, 18 October 2009

(Infusion Pump Main Page)


Meeting Purpose

IHE PCD Infusion Pump Working Group discussions.

WebEx Information

Topic: IHE PCD Infusion Pump WG

Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2009

Time: 14:00, Eastern Time (GMT -05:00, New York)

Duration: 60 Minutes


Note: Specific web & phone informaiton will be provided via e-mail to group members.

Contact Manny Furst for more information.

Proposed Agenda

1. Determine F2F issues
2. Atlanta HL7 meeting issues
3. Device Identification – Fred’s issue

Attachments / Materials

Discussion Notes

Chair/Host: Todd Cooper
Participants: Fred Ehrhardt, Al Engelbert, Colin FX, Chad Hays, Brad Lunde, Jeff Rinda, Paul Schluter, Erin Sparnon, Kristina Wilson, Jan Wittenber, Scott Zaffrin


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

Decisions/Issues:

  • Agenda was reviewed & approved without modification

Action(s):

2 F2F Issues
- Chair 		Status/Discussion:

Decisions/Issues:

  • The group decided that the issues to be discussed at the upcoming F2F meeting will be:
  • EUI-64 Usage
Rhoads / Schluter to clearly define use cases / deployment models & topologies / strategies to address legacy systems / etc.
  • Infusion Pump Model Finalization
This has to be done ASAP and will address many of the issues that have been brought up. Necessary for the normalization of the data flow.
  • Infusion Pump Device Specialization Content Profile
Todd to submit a proposal for this. This will force the development of a more comprehensive model that will have a name that we can hang our hats on and identify what is mandatory and how various infusion protocols (including bolus dosing, primary / secondary, etc.) and device types are to be communicated - albeit in the abstract. It will be a Volume 3 item, but it is TBD whether we will have it as separate Profile / Actor / Option rows in the product Integration Statements, or as e.g. an Option to DEC, which by default must have content that is conformant to the Harmonized Rosetta tables, but if we want to communicate to the end user that a given implementation also supports an I/P being used for infusion therapy / protocol X, then you need to also call out this (or related) content profiles.
Link to sample write-up on Bolus Dosing similar to what might be used in the Device Specialization Content Profile:
ftp://ftp.ihe.net/Patient_Care_Devices/Devices/InfusionPumps/20090917_WebEx/Bolus_dose_mode.jpg
  • Event Model
Decide how to handle normal operational milestone events vs. alarms / alerts.
  • Drug Information
Formalize this in the model & messaging.
Note: use of Metric::MDC_ATTR_ID_SUBSTANCE (ExtNomenRef) and Metric::MDC_ATTR_ID_SUBSTANCE_LABEL_STRING might be useful.
3 Device Identification (Fred’s issue - row #2)
- Chair 		Status/Discussion:

Decisions/Issues:

  • The general device context content profile will address these issues
  • Two separate issues at play here: Unique vs. Human Readable
  • Attributes exist to support the requested semantics:
    • MDS:: MDC_ATTR_ID_SOFT
    • VMS::MDC_ATTR_MODEL
  • Control Mechanism: Wittenber suggests that the "human readable" label requires a control structure which has been foreseen but is still to be finalized.
4 Next Meeting
- Chair

Decisions/Issues:

  • The group decided that the next meeting will be in 2 weeks on 9/30/2009.


Next Meeting

NOTE: Next Meeting will be held during the regularly scheduled time at 1400 Eastern on 9/30/2009 (60 minutes)


(Reviewed & approved by PCD Infusion Pump WG <TBD>


PCD Home

Retrieved from "http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php?title=PCD_Pump_2009-09-17_WebEx&oldid=37706"