Difference between revisions of "PA Interdependent Registries"
(New page: ==Introduction== The primary implementer of the HL7 V3 role-based registries appears to be Canada. Canada has production implementations of Client (AKA Patient) and Provider registries. At...) |
m (→Introduction) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The primary implementer of the HL7 V3 role-based registries appears to be Canada. Canada has production implementations of Client (AKA Patient) and Provider registries. At the May 2010 Working Group Meeting Ron Parker of Canada Infoway gave a presentation to the Patient Administration work group addressing lessons learned and future architectural plans for Canada. See Ron's presentation in the [http://www.hl7.org/Library/Committees/pafm/minutes/20100517_PA_WMG_Attachments.zip 20100517_PA_WMG_Attachements.zip file]. | The primary implementer of the HL7 V3 role-based registries appears to be Canada. Canada has production implementations of Client (AKA Patient) and Provider registries. At the May 2010 Working Group Meeting Ron Parker of Canada Infoway gave a presentation to the Patient Administration work group addressing lessons learned and future architectural plans for Canada. See Ron's presentation in the [http://www.hl7.org/Library/Committees/pafm/minutes/20100517_PA_WMG_Attachments.zip 20100517_PA_WMG_Attachements.zip file]. | ||
| − | The most significant finding is that real world applications require that different types of registries work together. The challenge for Patient Administration is to define interactions that span a number of topics: | + | The most significant finding is that real world applications require that different types of registries work '''together'''. The challenge for Patient Administration is to define interactions that span a number of topics: |
*Person topic (DSTU in Patient Administration domain) | *Person topic (DSTU in Patient Administration domain) | ||
Revision as of 00:17, 1 October 2010
Introduction
The primary implementer of the HL7 V3 role-based registries appears to be Canada. Canada has production implementations of Client (AKA Patient) and Provider registries. At the May 2010 Working Group Meeting Ron Parker of Canada Infoway gave a presentation to the Patient Administration work group addressing lessons learned and future architectural plans for Canada. See Ron's presentation in the 20100517_PA_WMG_Attachements.zip file.
The most significant finding is that real world applications require that different types of registries work together. The challenge for Patient Administration is to define interactions that span a number of topics:
- Person topic (DSTU in Patient Administration domain)
- Patient topic (DSTU in Patient Administration domain)
- Service Delivery Location (DSTU in Patient Administration domain)
- Provider topic (Normative R1 in Personnel Management domain)
- Organization topic (Normative R1 in Personnel Management domain)
Also, the Canadian Notional Architecture includes two additional registries for which a standard has not been defined. It seems possible that these additional registries would fall under the scope of a work group other than Patient Administration. Defining interactions that would also include these registries could present a technical challenge.
- Health Service
- Health Program
