2016-06-06 Rx Conf Call

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Attendees

  • Marla Albitz(Chair)
  • Michelle Miller (Scribe)
  • Lusia Li
  • John Hatem
  • Daniel Zhang
  • Yunwei Wang

Recap from HL7 WGM in Montreal

  • Meeting date/time to remain unchanged

ListServ

  • In addition to Listserv we need to monitor the Zulip discussions too.
  • Topic: Linking procedure with a medication

FHIR Maturity

  • Getting our resources to Level 2 and 3
  • Have identified several vendors that are using some of our resources which collective use all of our resources. Need to determine specifics of who and what, as well as, what documentation would be required to prove level.
 Complete Action item:  Marla to send email to FMG to inquire about evidence of requirements met for level 2 for proving level of maturity.
  • Response from Lloyd: For level 2, the requirement is that in some sort of real or test environment, at least 3 independently developed systems have shared the resource covering at least 80% of the data elements. You can capture the name of the connectathon or just a date and a list of the system vendors if it was done outside of connectathon (e.g. through Argonaut)
 Action  Marla to send email for implementer feedback via listserv


FHIR Discussion Items

June 6 Items

  • 8783 - Medication order status
    • Epic is withdrawing the gForge issue due to the recent addition of MedicationOrder.eventHistory.
 Action:  Marla to follow up with Lloyd to check if workflow will impact this (e.g. removal of MedicationOrder.eventHistory)
  • Understand Lusia Li requirements and enter tracker item (if Lusia Li attends this session)
    • Home Medications
    • How to query for home medications?
    • If we add a category (to both MedicationStatement and MedicationOrder), then at minimum, we'd need 4 categories:
      • Inpatient (what is administered during the inpatient visit, which does NOT include discharge medications)
      • Outpatient (what is administered during the outpatient visit, e.g. ED visit or Oncology visits)
      • OTC/Hx (e.g. a subset of Med Statements that are modifiable because they don’t represent “real” orders in the system, but rather patient statements)
      • Prescription (e.g. “real” prescription orders, often filled by a retail pharmacy and is administered outside of the context of an encounter, often at home)
 Action:  Daniel will check if the inpatient encounter id is associated with discharge medications (written at the end of the inpatient encounter)

 Completed Action:  Michelle will log gForge requesting the addition of category and email gForge to the listserv
  • We did discuss category being applicable within both MedicationStatement and MedicationOrder.
  • The question about how to represent “knowledge of externally stored orders” wasn’t explicitly discussed that I recall, but warrants clarification – as our system implemented those as MedicationStatements, which are a mix of explicit medication compliance/use statements as well as implicit compliance of both over-the-counter medications as well as knowledge of externally stored orders (from patient statement about another provider who prescribed the med). A ‘patient statement’ (regarding OTC meds or prescriptions from other providers/external orders) is implicitly communicating compliance/use = was taken – otherwise, the patient wouldn’t have made the statement at all.

Renaming MedicationOrder to MedicationRequest Discussion DEFERRED

  • From January 25 meeting: Lloyd shared the proposal to rename all request type resources to <resource>_Request. Seeking consistent name for all resources and term that encompasses larger swath of types of requests. An element beneath the tag instance would state the particular request, such as 'order'. This impacts the current Pharmacy Medication Order FHIR resource.
 Completed Action: Rx WG to discuss to determine if we agree or not. - agreed (with no vote) to comply with change but not needed to be made yet, per Lloyd
  • Lloyd suggested that we hold off on making the change, if we decide to make the change. Wait for FHIR Infrastructure group to workout additional details before we make the changes. May have impact on how other data elements are name or included.
  • Discussion: If we agree to the change, we'll need to review the description and other content for our resource to ensure that it accurately reflects the usage. This type of change will mean changes for implementers and it may not be as intuitive for implementers.
    • No decision to be made today. Will consider on a future call
 Action: to followup with Lloyd to find out status and/or next steps

FHIR Workflow Meetings Status DEFERRED

  • Status - there were no workflow meetings week of March 14th.
  • Discussion of Pharmacy Workflow Mockup (John)
    • Pharmacy has been providing input into the workflow meeting discussions. One suggestion is that Pharmacy create a Pharmacy specific workflow case similar to the one that is being created for lab. This work has not started yet, but John will start working on this in April.

Other business

Next meeting

  • Monday, June 13, 2016
  • Agenda