Conference call minutes 1 March 2016

Health Concern Topic

Patient Care WG

March 1st 2016

Attendees:

• Michael Tan – Chair/ Scribe
• David Pyke
• Larry McKnight
• David Tao
• Jay Lyle
• Michelle Miller

Participation Information Phone Number: +1 770-657-9270 Participant Passcode: 943377

Web Meeting Info www.webex.com Meeting number 238 558 505

Minutes 23 February

• There were no remarks about the minutes of February 23d.
• Motion to approve by Jay Lyle, second by David Tao
• Vote: 2 abstain, 0 oppose, 3 approve

DAM discussion

• David Pyke questions whether the requirements of producing a concern list from a collection under a health concern is part of the scope of a DAM for health concerns. Michael Tan does think so. If not here, where else would we describe the requirements? There is no other project of DAM where we could describe the required functionality, especially if these requirements are specific for health concerns.
• Jay Lyle explains that he has included list purpose and list kind as attributes of a concern list for this purpose.
• Michael Tan has doubts whether this is sufficient. If we have a big bag of events related to a health concern, then there will be 2 factors that influence the selection of events to a concern list:
  • criteria depending on the background of the profession and specialization such as security, but also field of interest. A viewer might not have any influence on this selection.
  • personal preference and filtering.
• David Tao recommends the group to view the possibilities of the FHIR resource on LIST. We will review the resource and come back on this topic the next time.

• Dan Russell makes a point that accountability for the health concern is an important issue. A system with health concerns must make auditing possible. Who has updated the concern or has changed certain properties of the health concern? In Dan's view the current model does not capture the responsible persons in the logging of events and what the persons has changed.
• Jay explains that the model must be seen as a snapshot in time. By comparing the different snapshots (instances) we would find out, what has changed and who has changed it.
• Michael Tan explains that our older models had the concept of health concern tracker. This was removed later on.
• The Contsys model of ISO prEN 13940 uses a Health Issue thread to relate different health issues to each other.
• The group decides to introduce a health concern change history class to express this requirement.
• this class should capture:

1. A time stamp when the changes were made
2. The person responsible for the change of the health concern.
3. The type of change that was made.

• It should be noted that these update changes are on the level of the health concern itself.
• The underlying health concern events have their own mechanism on how new observations are captured in time as events and how the findings (diagnosis) are related to these events.

Action items

• Adjust the diagram and add a health concern change history class: Jay
• Propose text about priorities between health concerns: David
• Revise text in Patient Journey story chapter 7.1; Michael

Go back to health concern minutes[[1]]