This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
<meta name="googlebot" content="noindex">

May 2015 WGM Paris, France: May 10 to May 15

From HL7Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Paris, France, WGM - May 2015 Patient Care WG Meeting Approved agenda:



Paris, France WGM - May 2015. Patient Care WG Meeting Meeting Minutes

  • Sunday, May 10 - International Council Meeting
- No PCWG meeting


Patient Care WGM, Monday, May 11, 2015


Monday Q1

Present:



Minutes:



Monday Q2

Present:



Miutes:



Patient Care Monday Q3

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care Monday Q4

Present:

  • Elaine Ayres ( chair)
  • Emma Jones
  • Laura Heermann Langford
  • Jay Lyle
  • Michael Tan (scribe)


Patient Care Administration Slide Deck Monday Q4


Minutes:

  • The minutes from San Antonio was approved. Moved by Laura, second by Michael.

Vote 4 approve, 0 against, 0 abstain.

Agenda review

  • CQI not present, so preparation of Connectathon Geneva will be added to the agenda. Laura will chair and Emma to scribe.
  • Brett wants to discuss some ballot comments on allergies on the joint meeting Wednesday.
  • We need a room for the co-chair lunch. This is instead of the Friday Q0. * Invite Stephen for Concern topic on Thursday.
  • Agenda moved by Laura and second by Emma: 4, 0,0.

WG Health

  • Patient Care has a healthy track record. We got a gold star again.
  • Co-chair elections have been deferred.
  • Elaine Ayres, Russ Leftwich, Laura Heermann Langford, Michael Tan's positions are due for re-election.
  • Extension of Elaine's co-chair position will not be likely , due to change of management at her office.

3 year planning

  • We will close project 1086.
  • What do we do with the DSTU of allergies and intolerances project 1004. We need to give comments before we can put it forware to Normative Edition. Please
  • Project 927 Vital Signs will be closed.
  • Project 881 Allergies DAM is completed and can be closed.
  • Need to check on assesment scales project 664 with William Goossen.
  • Check on project 661 on DCM for medical devices with Anneke Goossen.

New Projects

  • Care Plan EHR-functional model
  • HSI ( Healthcare Systems Integration) Reconciliation. This has been tested in IHE with CDA templates. The intention is to test this with FHIR resources.
  • Stephen Hasley: Maternal Health
    • Has organized active parties in maternal health.
    • Put up a data-set of about 600 data elements.
    • Project would probably look very similar to the CIC effort or the DEEDS project. Stephen would probably look for funding. Is Hasley a HL7 member?
    • This would also need a co-chair to guide the project. Would Russ pick up this project?



Patient Care Monday Q5: Placeholder for extra meeting if necessary

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care WGM, Tuesday, May 12, 2015


Patient Care Tuesday Q1

Present:

  • Michael Tan
  • Ken Chen
  • Laura Heerman Langford (chair)
  • Michelle Miller
  • Stephen Royce
  • Joshua Mandel
  • Jay Lyle (scribe)
  • Michel Rutten
  • Michael Donnelly
  • Emma Jones
  • Richard Errema
  • David Hay
  • Lloyd McKenzie (lead)
  • Simone Heckmann
  • Richard Kavanagh
  • (one more unsigned)


Minutes:

PC Q1 FHIR There are over 200 items for PC

Target: apply changes by mid-July; target early July to finish review.

  • 6866: Reaction issue. openEHR influence. Why won’t this meet use case requirements? Tabled pending participation of Elaine and Russ.
  • 7121: Procedure status. This could possibly be two resources: one a statement of fact (patient had an appendectomy on this date) and a more detailed resource to track procedure as it occurs. Alternatively, there are simple procedures and complex ones; perhaps address more granular statuses in extension for heavy procedure.

Could procedure be compositional, including steps that may or may not be resources?

How do systems act? Some interfaces focus on one procedure; some query sets.

We agree it needs to be a single resource: you don’t have to worry about which one to use. Cost is that the 80% boundary is fuzzy. Either make a small one and use extensions, or large one that can be profiled down. Implementers agree: one. Use an extension for additional statuses, via list of steps or procedures. FMG will create a common extension for this purpose.

    • PC task: define the detailed procedure extension. Not a July task.

Laura & Jay moved: 3 abstain; 0 against; 12 affirmative

  • 7123: Clem, procedure category vs type. Category is broad. Type is specific.

Codes make level clear, but rationale unclear. Need better definition for category, and change name for type to code, to align with Observation. No, make it “name.”

Add a note recognizing that care should be taken to avoid letting these elements could be semantically out of synch.

Michael moves; Jay seconds. Abstain: 4; Against: 0; Affirmative: 11

  • 7124: site. Approach vs. target site. Clem suggests target is always precoordinated.

Group feels both are needed, but they need disambiguation.

Perhaps this is target, and approach should be an extension?

No; add a coded property to body site to specify which. Optional, for legacy support. Role.

Jay moves; Stephen seconds. Abstain: 4; against: 0; affirmative: 11.

  • Lloyd provided a preview of 7128 (procedure note) & 7185 (impression) future discussion.



Patient Care Tuesday Q2

Present:


Michael Tan (Chair), Elaine Ayres (Scribe), Jay Lyle, Emma Jones, Laura Heermann-Langford, Stephen Chu (remote,) Thomas Kuhn, Lori Simon

Minutes: Michael reviewed the current status of the Health Concern project. There are three variations of use cases. 1. Someone may or may not be concerned with something someone else has put on the list. 2. Care team members may disagree about a judgment. 3. A patient disagrees that something is a concern.

In the Care Plan there is a concept of "expressed by" attribute associated with health concern. This should be represented in the health concern model. The health concern in care plan as expressed by role with 1..* cardinatlity. In Health Concern have "Concern Author" but the cardinality is 1..1.

Other roles in health concern - author, custodian and monitor. Care plan has an author and custodian of the care plan. Is the author of the care plan also the author of the health concern?? (modeled this way currently in care plan as it preceded the health concern work).

What if a concern is expressed in different terms (e.g. different words)? Is this a fourth use case? A diagnosis can be "Name 1" and "Name 2" as the issue evolves. Diagram has a replaces function but noted that arrows should support replaced by. Need to be able to support labels for "expressed" by patient, mom, spouse. Need to be able to distinguish between the author of the concern vs. the author of an event (e.g. a different diagnosis).

The concern has one author, but there can be multiple names of the concern that could be authored by one or more individuals (to support the many events within a concern). Therefore, need to associate authors and events.....

1. Actions - attached an author to an event. Create an expressed by concept with the associated term used by the "expressor".

Note similarities to Chief Complaint -- what the patient said, vs. coded chief complaint. An HPI (history of present illness) will add additional information. A narrative associated with a health concern would help with the creation of chief compliant.

The first expression by the patient -- should that be retained or is it a snapshot? Retaining the term will allow for tracking over time. Would you be able to find this term without the "expressed by".

2. Expressed by will be associated with the event level not the concern level. Cardinality will be 1..* This will allow the dare plan to point to the health concern (grey box). This removes the risk of inconsistency.

The notion of a Concern focal event needs to be addressed as well.


MOTION: To ensure many naming events (1..*) are captured, add expressed by to ConcernFocalEvent as a relationship. This is a role property and will be a separate associated box. Will rename the ConcernFocalEvent box as part of this change.

MOVE: Jay/Laura Object - 0, Abstain - 0, Approve - 6

Issue - SDWG -- deprecated "Clinical Status" in C-CDA 2.0. SDWG recommended use of mood codes. Discuss during Thursday Q2.

NOTE: Include the ED group in the near term to review these changes.

Other issues with the model? no other issues noted.

Other topics -- older models, FHIR, review use cases.











Patient Care Tuesday Q3

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care Tuesday Q4

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care WGM, Wednesday, May 13, 2015


Patient Care Wednesday Q1

Present:


Minutes:



Patient Care Wednesday Q2

Present:


Minutes:



Patient Care Wednesday Q3

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care Wednesday Q4

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care WGM, Thursday, May 14, 2015


Patient Care Thursday Q1

Present:


Minutes:



Patient Care Thursday Q2 (PCWG, SDWG, Template Joint meeting)

Present:


Minutes:




Patient Care Thursday Q3

Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care Thursday Q4

Present:



Minutes:



Patient Care WGM, Friday, May 15, 2015


Patient Care Friday Q0: PCWG Co-Chairs meeting

Present:


Minutes:




Patient Care Friday Q1


(1) Template WG meeting

- PCWG representative(s) to attend

(2) Agenda: open

- Possible: Clinical Connectathon



Present:


Minutes:



Patient Care Friday Q2


Agenda: open

Possible: Clinical Connectathon


Present:


Minutes:



Patient Care Friday Q3


Agenda: open

Possible: Clinical Connectathon


Present:



Minutes:




Patient Care Friday Q4


Agenda: open

Possible: Clinical Connectathon


Present:



Minutes:



Retrieved from "https://wiki.hl7.org/w/index.php?title=May_2015_WGM_Paris,_France:_May_10_to_May_15&oldid=99890"