Difference between revisions of "Pharm Tech Minutes 2021.06.23"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Michael tan (talk | contribs) |
Michael tan (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
* The IPS is just a collection of medication statements. | * The IPS is just a collection of medication statements. | ||
* We should not use the same name as IPS. Suggestion to use medication treatment view. | * We should not use the same name as IPS. Suggestion to use medication treatment view. | ||
+ | * Indication is mentioned on different levels. It also depends on the setting where to mention the indication. | ||
== Any other business == | == Any other business == |
Revision as of 04:35, 23 June 2021
Minutes
Welcome
- Participants
- Jose Costa Teixeira
- Stephane Spahni
- Michael Tan
- Juergen Brandstaetter
- Marc Robberecht
- Review and Approve Agenda
Medication lists
- Sandbox Belgium
- A patient has a treatment plan. This could initiated by the patient, but more often it could be a plan from a Care Provider.
- There could be multiple plans from different care providers.
- The diagram is actually treatment centric.
- Agreement that there is a treatment, but difference is where to draw the line.
- In the NL the treatment line is part of the prescription and the prescription is similar with the supply request.
- the rules where to find the correct dosage will depend on the settings in the different countries.
- rules to the period will differ per country. A current medication summary in NL means the last 6 months. In Switzerland it is what the patient is using now. Point is that we would like to define the differences.
- Within FHIR it makes it easier to map to another format from another country.
- The IPS is just a collection of medication statements.
- We should not use the same name as IPS. Suggestion to use medication treatment view.
- Indication is mentioned on different levels. It also depends on the setting where to mention the indication.