Pharm Tech Minutes 2020.05.15

Agenda

Welcome

• Participants

• Jürgen Brandstätter
• Stephane Spahni
• Michael Tan
• Jose Costa Teixeira
• Karima Bourquard
• Marc Robberecht
• Oliver Egger
• Harri Nurmi

Main topics to discuss

• ) IHE Pharmacy logical information model (agnostic, shall be instantiated in CDA or FHIR)

• Dimensions:

• Content

• Classic: CDA
• FHIR: FHIR resources / FHIR documents

• Transport

• Classic: XDS/SOAP
• FHIR: RestFul

• Workflow

• Same for both concepts

• IHE Pharmacy FHIR resources

• ) and relation with work of Oliver Egger for Switzerland

• Current Medication Plan = Medication and clinics purpose
• Based on CMPD, MTP, PRE, DIS, PADV, PML (CDA)
• So it includes also eP and eD, but parallel to paper prescription

• Paper-replacing ePrescription system at a later point (not scheduled yet)

• Technical specification for the eMedication services shall include CDA and FHIR
• FHIR-IGs created, which are equivalent to the Swiss CDA specifications for the content (less than IHE specification)

• "FHIR Documents", but transported with classic XDS/SOAP transport
• Swiss FHIR IGs

• and relation with work of Jürgen in Austria

• Fully operational eMedication system in place on Austrian eHealth Infrastructure ELGA, clinical purpose only
• Based on CMPD, PRE, DIS, PADV, PML (CDA)

• and relation with work of Harri in Finland

• Fully operational eP system online since 2010

• Content are Finish specifications based on CDA

• Idea is to move this to FHIR
• Project status: in consideration phase, survey among vendors, if they are willing to do it

• and relation with work of Jose in Belgium

• Dispense record already exists in a propriety Belgium standard
• Projects on FHIR about to start:

• Migrate Dispense record to FHIR
• Medication scheme (clinical purpose)

• Regarding transport: undecided, different groups vote for either Document / Restful / Messages
• Logical model for a "Medication Treatment Record" created (model for MTP)

• Conclusion

• Options for transport:

• 1) FHIR-document transported by CMPD (XDS/SOAP)
• 2) FHIR-document transported by Restful method via MHD pluged to CMPD (server side is still XDS/SOAP)
• 3) Pure RestFul transport

• Analysis:

• Advantages for (1) and (2):

• FHIR-document specifications could be easily created based on the pre-work of Switzerland
• CMPD does not have to changed
• MHD must customized

• Disadvantate of (1) and (2):

• Countries like Austria, etc. would not buy in, because they don't want SOAP and/or CDA

Secondary topics to discuss

• ) FHIR-CMPD (i.e. CMPD Actor working in a homogeneous FHIR environment, accessed through FHIR API and accessing FHIR servers)

• ) Extended FHIR/XDS CMPD (not sure what is really possible - up to a CMPD actor being accessed either through FHIR or XDS API and accessing XDS repositories as well as FHIR servers)

• ) MHD front-end to PHARM-1 (i.e. existing CMPD working with XDS repositories but accessed with a REST API)

Next meeting

• tbd by doodle

Pharmacy Technical Committee