Difference between revisions of "2012-05-14 PA WGM Minutes"
m |
m (→Monday Q4) |
||
| Line 503: | Line 503: | ||
|colspan="4" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | |colspan="4" style="background:#f0f0f0;"| | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | |colspan="4" |'''Quorum Requirements Met''' (Chair + 4 members): '''Y | + | |colspan="4" |'''Quorum Requirements Met''' (Chair + 4 members): '''Y''' |
|} | |} | ||
<!---======================================================= | <!---======================================================= | ||
Revision as of 15:37, 15 May 2012
Patient Administration Work Group Minutes - Monday May 14, 2012
Monday Q1
| HL7 Patient Administration Meeting Minutes Location: Room # 2761 |
Date: 2012-05-14 Time: Monday Q1 | ||
| Facilitator | Irma Jongeneel | Note taker | Alex de Leon |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation | |
| X | Alex de Leon | Kaiser Permanente | |
| X | Irma Jongeneel | HL7 Netherlands | |
| X | Barry Guinn | EPIC | |
| X | Iryna Roy | HL7 Canada | |
| Quorum Requirements Met (Chair + 4 members): N | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
Welcome/introductions
- Approve agenda
- Review PA mission & charter
- Review PA decision making practice
- Review PA 3-year work plan
Supporting Documents
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
The week's agenda was reviewed by the WG:
The WG may use Wed Q1 and Q2 for inderdependent registries if we complete the work, since we have representation for this work.
For Wed Q4, Harmonization proposals. Link/Unlink will be discussed, answering the commentor of why this was rejected by harmonization.
The mission and charter was then reviewed. There was discussion whether these will be reviewed once a year in January as is done in some other WGs. This can be voted upon once quorum is reached.
The WG reviewed the Decision Making Practices and noted that this is consistent with current requirements.
Motion: Barry motioned, Irnya second to lower quorum from chair plus 4 to chair plus 3.
Vote: 4/0/0
Discussion: None
Motion passed.
The WG continued to review the PA mission and charter.
In reviewing the formal relationships with other work groups, the WG considered for future work a "harmonization" of the financial management domain and patient adminstration domains to assure that they work together.
Under formal relationships with other work groups, where it states Infrastrucutre and Messaging (for registries) expanding the text in parens to include location of the registries topic within Specification infrastructure-messaging-master file/ registry infrastucture.
The WG reviewed the decision making practices, the WG considered officially lowering quorum within the decision making practices. Irma suggested that we check with HL7 governance to do so.
A motion was made by Alex to officially change the decision making practices quorum from co-chair plus 4 to co-chair plus 3, as long as it is permitted by the HL7 governance.
Seconded by Irnya
Vote: 3/0/0
Discussion: Irnya stated that we still need to make decisions, even though attendance has waned due to the stability of the standard. This decision will be in line with the historical practices within the last year and a half, where we have had to lower quorum to chair plus 3.
Meeting Outcomes
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
Monday Q2
| HL7 Patient Administration Meeting Minutes Location: Llano conference room |
Date: 2011-01-16 Time: Monday Q2 | ||
| Facilitator | Irma Jongeneel | Note taker | Alex de Leon |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation | |
| X | Alex de Leon | Kaiser Permanente | |
| X | Irma Jongeneel | HL7 Netherlands | |
| X | Barry Guinn | EPIC | |
| X | Iryna Roy | HL7 Canada | |
| X | Gaby Jewell | Cerner | |
| X | Oyvind Aassve | HL7 Norway | |
| Quorum Requirements Met (Chair + 4 members): Y | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- V3 Work – Service Delivery Location - Peter Goldschmidt
Supporting Documents
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
The US Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research (AHRQ) developed a set of service delivery codes to support their Common Formats reporting templates, and SNOMED has also created codes. Ted Klein (on behalf of AHRQ) is apparently evaluating the two code sets. There may be a need to review/discuss any service delivery location code sets that are referenced in the specifications within the scope of the PAWG.
The WG reviewedd the service delivery location DMIM to give context to the members. Iryna reviewed what HL7 Canada uses for these codes. They use the HL7 codes.
The WG reviewed the role codes for the service delivery location. These would be the codes to be compared to the SNOMED codes. The WG continued to look at the encounter model to review how the service delivery location is modeled there.<be/>
The WG attempted to define the work for this, but could not after reviewing the models. We understand that there are SNOMED codes, the codes developed by the AHRQ and the HL7 service delivery codes that need to be reviewed, but the WG feels that current needs might be met by the codes referenced, until we can meet with representatives from Patient Safety.
Current implementations will most likely be adversly affected by any change from the current HL7 usage of codes to SNOMED codes. The WG needs to take this into consideration before deciding to change. Currently Canada is using the HL7 list as currently defined. HL7 Norway will confirm what codes they are using. Gaby noted that in the US for the consolidated CDA, there is a usage of National Healthcare location code that seems to be derived from the CDC references.
The WG at this point is at an empass with this topic at this point.
Advise Ted, Lise and Peter that we have implementors using the service delivery locations as defined within the (Encounter) specification for Service Delivery Location.
The WG considers that we do have implementaions that use the current HL7 vocabulary for Service Delivery Location codes and implementing SNOMED within administrative systems would be a huge impact. There is not enough interest in moving to SNOMED for these systems to recommend changing the current usage of HL7 codes. No requirements have been found to move to SNOMED
Meeting Outcomes
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
Monday Q3
| HL7 Patient Administration Meeting Minutes Location: Garden Terrace, Suite #137 |
Date: 2012-05-14 Time: Monday Q3 | ||
| Facilitator | Alex de Leon | Note taker | Alex de Leon |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation | |
| X | Alex de Leon | Kaiser Permanente | |
| X | Irma Jongeneel | HL7 Netherlands | |
| X | Barry Guinn | EPIC | |
| X | Iryna Roy | HL7 Canada | |
| X | Nat Wong | HL7 Australia | |
| X | Christian Hay | GS1 | |
| Quorum Requirements Met (Chair + 4 members): Y | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- V3 Work - Patient ID - presented by Christian Hay
Supporting Documents
Presentation
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Christian Hay presented the Health Informatics - Automated identification adn data capture marking and labelling - Subject of ccare and Individual Provider Identification.
Joint Initiative Council (JIC) - Came out of Australia. Reduce duplication of efforts around patient identification, specifically around data capture of patient identification. GS1 is part of this joing initiative and is a standards development organization, nearly 40 years old, dedicated to supply chain(supermarkets, etc.). However, this organization has been working on healthcare since 2005. Therefore GS1 is here to assure that the efforts are in synch.
GS1 provides an architecture for tracking.
At the end of last year was the end of the JIC/GS1 work. At the start of 1/1/12, the JIC/ISO work began. Vancouver NWIP endo of ISO Ballot in August. Vienna CD draft.
Christian Hay continued to show the "ISO_Working_Doc_PatientID.v0.005.doc"
Globally unique identification is necessary for many healthcare entities.
After the presentation, our gracious chairperson asked what the WG could do to help this effort. One, how to bring this information incorporated into our specification for capturing patient identification.
The WG proceeded to discuss the identifiers and the context. There were questions around whether the bar codes defined in this standard would contain "patient identifier", "encounter identifier", etc.
Irma proceeded to show where these GS1 identifiers may coincide. To do so, we reviewed the Patient Encounter DMIM, and reviewed the various identifiers.
Meeting Outcomes
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
Monday Q4
| HL7 Patient Administration Meeting Minutes Location: Garden Terrace, Suite #137 |
Date: 2012-05-14 Time: Monday Q4 | ||
| Facilitator | Irma Jongeneel | Note taker | Alex de Leon |
| Attendee | Name | Affiliation | |
| X | Alex de Leon | Kaiser Permanente | |
| X | Irma Jongeneel | HL7 Netherlands | |
| X | Barry Guinn | EPIC | |
| X | Iryna Roy | HL7 Canada | |
| Quorum Requirements Met (Chair + 4 members): Y | |||
Agenda
Agenda Topics
- V3 Work Preparation Discussion- Harmonization of Encounter and Care Provision models
Supporting Documents
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Irma, who has been working with Patient Care to harmonize the encounter topic, expressed her understanding that Patient Care is intending to bring the "new" model normative as soon as possible. The WG worked to review the current encounter model to identify areas of concern in the combined model.
There were a number of items that were missing from the joint model. The WG reviewed these and produced a list of items to be addressed during the joint meeting tomorrow with Patient Care Q1.
This list includes:
- Entry point to the Encounter act is missing in the new model
- Performer can be joined or expressed using participant? Definitions needed to be verified
- Transportation structure is missing in the new model
- reason participation needs the priorityNumber to identify primary diagnosis, secondary, etc. sequenceNumber is not serving the same purpose
- reference-AccountGuarantor is in the new model and has business requirements to be present.
- sequelTo is missing in the new model. Is it covered by the new model at all?
The WG would like to know if HL7 Norway is using ItemStorage participation ObservationEvent from the Encounter model in Norway. Irma sent an email to Line Saele asking if it is being used.
Meeting Outcomes
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
- Go To Monday Minutes
- Go To Tuesday Minutes
- Go To Wednesday Minutes
- Go To Thursday Minutes
- Return to PA May 2012 WGM
- Return to PA Main Page
© 2011 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
