PaLM Conf Minutes 2023-March-08

Attendees

Raj Dash	Jim McNulty
Kevin Schap	Rob Rae
James Harrison	Riki Merrick
Megumi Kondo	Ralf Herzog
Dan Rutz	Jason Lowder
Alessandro Sulis	Gunter Haroske
JD Nolen	Ruben Fernandes
Francesca Frexia	Ricardo
Norman Zerba

Next Meeting is April 12, 2023

• F2F meeting planning
  • F2F meeting in Budapest - dates and draft agenda (https://www.ecdp2023.org/)
  • 1 full day for PaLM to add to the planning agenda.
  • Might be easy to find something for June 17/18, will check for June 15th (but conference is pretty booked). Norman to check.
  • DICOM approved a joint meeting on June 14 starting at 4:30; we have a room for the entire day; PaLM can meet separately in the AM.

POST CALL NOTE: After the meeting, Raj was able to adjust his schedule and he is now available before June 14th. As a result, June 13-14th is now an option for PaLM to meet separately on the 13th and morning of the 14th and with DICOM WG 26 on the afternoon of June 14th. This information has been conveyed to Norman Zerbe requesting the addition of June 13th as a meeting date.

• GS1 Sample Tube Identification (Ralf/Riccardo)
  • Each lab has their own ID schema, but it is not globally unique, and some labs reuse identifiers over time.
  • You can add the facility identifier to sample identifier, but that does not solve the re-use issue.
  • Proposal is to have a sample tube level number:
    • Need sample tube type, manufacturer, serial number (currently only tracked to lot number)
    • Need to be able to link to parents.
  • At draw time the tube and patient scan and is linked at the sample collection time.
  • What about CLSI and CLIA rules around human readable identifiers?
  • Working on 2D barcode (and size there may be an issue)
  • Max limit of 52 characters
  • Some automation systems require 1D barcodes, so you may need to print both kinds on the label.
  • GS1 is not proposing a converter to the 1D barcode,
  • Any way to get CLSI AUTO-14 and GS1 to work on this together (Riccardo tried unsuccessfully)?
    • Alexis Carter and Riccardo are both on that group - CAP Standards Committee also have contacts.
  • Action for IHE PaLM:
    • Need to review where this might affect any PalM specifications.
    • LBL, LAW, LTW, ILW, SET
      • SAC-3 is EI. C.LEN is 199= so HL7v2 is ready for it
      • The 20- and 22-character limit we removed for LAW (perhaps LDA also) on a CPs – AFAIR.
  • Important to also track tube types – tube top color is not standard.
  • How to handle downtime situations?
    • Would have to maintain special printers or have handwritten labels?
    • GS1 benefit is that the tube is already labeled.
    • Could you use your phone to read and then transcribe it?
    • You MUST have human readable and a second identifier, so you have to print the label anyways.
  • The benefit is the uniqueness of the container.
  • What about samples without containers?
    • Use of tags – each tag can also have that unique ID.
    • That means all container manufacturers of all types would create containers with IDs, and those would be the only acceptable specimen carriers. Is that practical?
  • We are looking for feedback on these two proposals and how they will affect the lab.
  • For HL7: Change proposal to add GTIN to HL70301 and HL70203.
• DPIA updates (Alessandro)
  • LINK TO GOOGLE SHEET - : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Uxmbxgljh0dEfkKPL89Dz7XkQwnGSNlEkBXG-tyQzO4/edit#gid=717291144
  • Checked in Gazelle how the test is defined for LAW to apply this to DPIA for the HL7 side – broadcast, query and updates.
  • Full workflow and retrieve images involve DICOM transactions, which we need to check for; David Clunie shared feedback, so that all DICOM required information is present in the HL7 transactions.
    • There are some issues with the mapping between to V2 and DICOM model:
      • Most scanner currently only encode the accession of the slide
      • No patient information part of the slide – the assumption is to have access to the EMR.
  • Raj is working on a change proposal for that.
  • Create a second test scenario to cover the more complete test scenario that will result in the creation of the shareable DICOM image:
    • The hardest to do is the proper specimen preparation – SPM-6 does not support the intended use of the additive, which is what the scanner needs.
    • 
      • We could add OBX segments to describe the specific steps.
      • We could add a new field to SPM for additive modifier.
    • Sectra receives that information from the LIS with all the metadata – using OML 22
      • Using SPM-6 for stain only.
  • DPIA is focused on the whole slide image. If meta-data is added to the image after it is created, should we add the next information with a different transaction to the image manager as part of DPIO?
  • Test cases to be reviewed: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Uxmbxgljh0dEfkKPL89Dz7XkQwnGSNlEkBXG-tyQzO4/edit#gid=2047143987
  • IGAMT profiles to be reviewed next time- need to have user account.
• CP updates to the TF (Alessandro)
  • Approved CPs are listed on wiki page.
  • Alessandro will have a new release.
  • Need to find the location for TF11.0.
• IHE European Connectathon – Sept 25-29 in Rennes, France
  • Registration ends May 26, early bird rate Mar 30.
  • Special 50% off rates for IHE LTW and LAW.
  • Request for webinar on PaLM (overview) and intro to DPIA and SET profiles.
    • Riki, Raj and Alessandro will plan something.
• PaLM Annual report (Riki) – will send draft to listserv and approval next month.
• In April we will hold a 2 hour meeting to ensure we get the DPIA (and SET) test cases and message profiles reviewed.

• FROM CHAT:
  • Rúben Fernandes: SAC-3 is EI. C.LEN is 199= so HL7v2 is ready for it :)
  • Ralf Herzog: the 20 and 22 Chars Limit we removed for LAW (perhaps LDA also) with one of my CPs - AFAIR ...
  • James Harrison: So all container manufacturers of all types would create containers with IDs, and those would be the only acceptable specimen carriers? Is that practical?
  • Gunter Haroske: I think it’s presently not
  • James Harrison: I do think you’d want to make sample identifiers as uniform as possible across local information systems, so this is basically an all or none proposal.
  • Gunter Haroske: For this scenario I agree
  • James Harrison: Is there a statement of the GS1 proposal that is linkable? The CAP Informatics Committee might comment on this.