2019-06-20 Meeting Notes

Welcome, agenda review, meeting minute approval

1. 6/27 Call
   1. Will be a packed week. Do we want to extend to a 90 minute call?
   2. Will folks be available to make this worth wile?
   3. Erin will be out on 6/27
   4. Only two people stated that they couldn’t make it next week or stay on
   5. Will tentatively plan for 90 minutes next week
   6. Need to follow up with syndromic
2. Meeting minutes from last week:
1. Motion- Mead moves to approve minutes
2. Second-Sarah
3. Vote- 16,0,0

BSeR FHIR IG Ballot Comment Reconciliation Proposals (20190620).pptx

Ballot Spreadsheet- FHIR BSeR

1. Comment group 5- terminology binding specifications
   1. 10, 41,46,47,49,61,63,66,97,99,100
   2. Limited/improper terminology binding details
   3. to address these issues would like to have an entire page dedicated to terminologies that includes links to the appropriate codeSystem information
2. Comment group 8- Alignment with US Core IG
   1. 14,15,16,17,84
   2. There are several that can be based on US Core. Will be going back and adjusting base definition to indicate based on US Core
   3. Persuasive and will use the applicable  US Core for these profiles
3. PULLS- 4 from Craig- 56, 58, 60,64 would like to add these to the agenda for 6/27
4. Motion- AMS moves to approve both blocks (5&8) as dispositioned and documented
5. Second- Mead
6. Discussion: Lori- There is concern with US CORE when we are trying to br bring international. No ballot comments were submitted on this concern. There has been interest in the VR IGs internationally. This is really an ONC issue since they are pushing US CORE and USCDI. Pressure to use these are building. Would like to discuss on a future call.
7. Vote- For- 15, Abstain-2 (Lori, Karla), Against-0

VRDR FHIR IG ballot reconciliation

VRDR FHIR IG Ballot Comment Reconciliation Proposals 20190620.pptx

Ballot spreadsheet- FHIR VRDR

1. No pulls
2. Comment group 8: Disposition of Remains
   1. Items 18-23 on the certificate: how the remains are dispositioned
3. Comment group 10: Funeral Home Director
   1. 1, 44, 49, 62, 67, 180, 181
4. Motion- AMS moves to approve both blocks (8 & 10) as dispositioned
5. Second- Mead
6. Vote- For-16, Abstain-1 (Karla), Against-0

Ballot Spreadsheet V2.6 VRDR

1. 65 & 79- suggestion
   1. Motion- Mead moves to approve as persuasive and will update as documented
   2. Second- AMS
   3. Vote- 17,0,0
1. Question to the significance of the “_15”, “_3”
2. Will delete post IGAMT export
3. How do you distinguish each flavor? Each created segment has some details added to the end of the along with a suffix. The suffix adds no value.
2. 67- suggestion
   1. Motion- Mead moves to approve as persuasive and will update as documented
   2. Second- AMS
   3. Vote- 17,0,0
1. Will provide clarifying text 7.4 segment and Field Description that notes that each segment flavor stands alone a restriction on the base segment
3. 68- suggestion
   1. Motion- Mead moves to approve as persuasive with mod and will update as documented
   2. Second- AMS
   3. Vote- 17,0,0
1. Need to have the usage and condition predicate in the segment definition table for PDA-4 and -5.
2. Upon review, the usage was actually incorrect and should be R, therefore no condition predicate needed.
4. 70- negative
   1. Motion- Mead moves to approve as persuasive with mod and will update as documented
   2. Second- AMS
   3. Vote- 16,0,0
1. The sparse segments replace and constrain the more robust ones. We will add text at the section level 7.4 that explains this.
5. 72- suggestion
1. Issue with having to populate SSN with 9’s if unknown. Does ‘should be’ imply a need to support the ability to do this?
2. This is a part of the normal business practice for those who use this.
3. It is understood by the parties exchanging information
4. If it’s unknown, don’t send it. The element is considered RE.
5. Some states are not able to send SSN.

Need to table for next time. Lori will double check to see how this was handled in the connect-a-thon testing.

1. eICR CDA IG Release 2 block 2 vote

Ballot spreadsheet CDA eICR

1. No pulls
2. 12,13,21,31,54,55,59,60,66,73,75,79,87,121,127,136,137,141
3. Concern with the VSAC agreement; talk with the vocabulary workgroup since all of the CCDA value sets are in VSAC. Trying to get things out of PHIN VADS because of lack of reliability and all of the MU specifications in VSAC.
4. Issue with retired medication RXNorm not included in value sets and how that is expected to be adopted if hospitals are still using them.
5. Good comments but not specific to this specification. These are common practices expressed in CDA documents. Need to find the right place in HL7 to pursue.
   1. Motion- Laura moves to approve block as dispositioned and will update as documented
   2. Second- Sarah
   3. Vote- For-15, Abstain-1 , Against-0

NCHS Block Vote

Ballot spreadsheet CDA NHCS

1. No pulls
1. Motion- Sarah moves to approve block as dispositioned and will update as documented
2. Second- Cindy
3. Vote- 15,0,0
2. Will be going to ballot in Sept and will be working on the NIB next week