Planning assessed work items

The IHE ITI domain has received work items proposals to be developed, see https://trello.com/b/IH4FPDhN

Some of them have been already selected to be developed, see Current development.

Others have been assessed and they are stored in this present page for a further selection.

The other work items proposals received are available on the Under assessement by planning.

The item proposals are available on the ftp site

The list of potential new work items is given for imformation.

ITI Planning Prioritization

as of February 19, 2019

1. #Reminder ITI FHIR profiles to R4
2. #Add restfull feed to ATNA
3. #Add RESTful capabilities to DSUB
4. #Enhance ITI-44 and ITI-46 transactions (PIXv3 Feed and Update Notification) to support also patient delete/deactivation and unmerge
5. #Alignment of XDM/XDR with the DirectTrust implementation guide for representing Message Context

Add RESTful capabilities to DSUB

This proposal is in line with the work already carried out for Mobile access to Health Documents (MHD) with XDS on FHIR, in searching and retrieving documents through RESTful capabilities. This work item consists of studying how to subscribe or unsubscribe, from a mobile application, in order to receive notifications when a clinical document has been created. This work will be achieved in adding restful capabilities to the Document Metadata Subscription profile (DSUB).

Enhance ITI-44 and ITI-46 transactions (PIXv3 Feed and Update Notification) to support also patient delete/deactivation and unmerge

The purpose of this proposal is to respond to real-life scenarios in which patient data must be deleted or merged. This work item consists of enhancing the Patient Identity Feed HL7 V3 [ITI-44] and PIXV3 Update Notification [ITI-46] transactions by developing Delete and Merge options.

Alignment of XDM/XDR with the DirectTrust implementation guide for representing Message Context

This work item proposal has two main aims:

• Analyzing the gaps between the current IHE XDR/XDM specifications and the Implementation Guide for Message Context developed by the DirectTrust community. This review effort will enable to identify and issue recommendations of merging, or (at least) converging possibilities between the two set of specifications.
• Applying the changes identified to the IHE XDR/XDM specifications while extending the perimeter of the uses cases covered to fully take in consideration the use of Direct Secure Messaging (DSM).

The work item suggests that this effort will optimize interoperability by reducing the number of implementation options.

Remainder ITI FHIR profiles to R4

Planning meeting (March 1, 2019): The profiles selected to be converted in FHIR R4 are mACM, PIXm, and NPFS.

There are some ITI Profiles that are using FHIR, but are not using the current version of FHIR. FHIR R4 has been released for use December 2018. The priority set of profiles have been converted to R4, so this proposal is requesting that a project be undertaken to convert the remainder to R4. Those that are not to be converted to R4 should be retired.

ITI should consider if PCC or QRPH need assistance at converting their profiles as well. This given that we did help PCC with QEDm.

Survey of network interfaces form (SNIF)

It is time consuming and difficult to get simple clear answers to basic information about interfaces or web services in use at a healthcare organization.
This profile provides a consistent way for all organizations to provide this information would allow people to easily compare what is available for review and also would allow systems to directly connect.
Each healthcare organization can securely publish a list of available or pending network interfaces. This information can be electronically queried and then reviewed by people. It can also be used by systems to directly connect or to populate connectivity information into configuration files.
A consistent way of presenting the information would allow users to easily see what is in use at an institution and allow systems to automate connections. This profile is a content profile that specifies the information and provides that a creator and consumer.

Re-Document MU

Now that we have RMU, what would MU look like if we re-started today? Might it be a standalone profile rather than options on XDS? Might it be updates to RMU?

Potential New Work Items - not proposed

The following is a list of things that have been spoken about, but for which we have not received a formal new work item proposal

• XDM on FHIR -- usecases from XDM, but where the encoding of the metadata is using FHIR structure
  • Could extend to carrying non-Document resources on portable media
  • https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/65-ihe/topic/FHIR.20based.20XDM
• MHD asynchronous -- usecases from MHD, but where there is a need for asynchronous. Such as MHD as an API to XCA where the asynchronous MHD would allow for non-blocking
  • https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com/2018/09/improving-document-exchange-response.html
• FHIR Client security -- package up the requirements for a FHIR Client to be secure. Subset of ATNA without client side cert + IUA +???
• SMART-on-FHIR usecases -- authorization of application space, specification of OAuth scope, specification of OAuth interaction (beyond IUA has today)
  • SMART-on-FHIR is about to be published as normative STU from HL7
  • Must deal with SMART-on-FHIR overlap. Is there anything to profile? Can we just reference SMART?
• FHIR Maturity for MHD and other profiles -- some of the FHIR resources are not being naturally matured, where as IHE may be the best organization to focus on that (e.g. MHD)
  • DocumentReference and DocumentManifest -- need IHE to help them progress through the FMM levels.
  • DocumentManifest needs introduction, scope, etc
  • Both need testing proof etc.
• MHD On-Demand -- document how MHD would support On-Demand -- where backend is XDS, where backend is XCA, where backend is native FHIR
• PAM on FHIR -- all of the PAM use-cases in FHIR form
• Re-Document ITI-18 -- simplify, clarify, various items Thing ONE
• Work more closely with PCC and QRPH to align their newest work with ITI
• Work toward a more continuous release structure vs the yearly schedule we now have
• Profiling of CDS-hooks for specific clinical usecases. Or does this become a clinical domain responsibility (PCC, etc)
• Provider Directory maturity
  • Alignment with Argonaut
  • Alignment with Sequoia Directory
  • Alignment with DirectTrust.org Directory
• Overall alignment of our FHIR profiles with Argonaut and/or Da Vinci
• Add in Sequoia - CareQuality -- Point-of-Care Consent mechanism to XCPD and XCA

See Also

• Return to ITI Planning Committee
• Return to IT Infrastructure domain page

--