- Mega Report Out
- Report out provided by:
- EHR WG
- LHS WG
- Report out provided by:
Slide deck from Giorgio Cangioli and Rob Hausam
- Main topic is International Patient Summary:
- Data-set: ( 1 CDA (balloted and approved) and 1 FHIR ( has passed, but reballot in September). Today we will discuss what we bring to ballot.
- Is the IPS CDA maintained with the feedback from the FHIR ballot? Actually the focus is on the FHIR publication.
- Argonaut is based on FHIR release 2 and working on an upgrade to release 4. Trying to get harmonized with the IPS. There is a document available with the differences from Michele Mottini.
- Big issue to be solved is with slizing.
- Also looking for solution to facilitate the local adoption for example terminology.
- Christoff Gessner asks what is the normative material? Can this be found in Github?
- This is dependant on what you are seeking and would like to contribute. This could be the IG. Giorgio explains that the material is in Github and the publication also produces a package with which you can facilitate.
- Medication Statement is used to declare that (certain) medication is not used. There is a comment, that currently the medication reference is too heavy to use for just one code. The commenter would like just to mention one code. A suggestion was raised to put the medication in codable concept. This leads to an error in the build of the publication. Argonaut does not have this issue, because they do not register not used medication.
- Alexander Henket states that in Netherlands they rule out the codable concept and can only use the medication reference, because for IT systems it is more difficult if there are 2 options.
- Rob Hausam wants to know what to do correctly and what we could do temporarily?
- What is the onsetDatetime for no known allergy in AllergyIntolerance? This onsetDatetime is now required. Question whether this should be conditional?
- Alexander mentions that 2 slices in medication statement have the same name.
- These are slicing issues which tooling should fix. ( Grahame).
- General topic on IPS versus Argonaut. How do we manage alignment when we do not want to be realm specific. Look at the whitepaper comparison between Argonaut and IPS from Michel Mottoni. This document can be found here:
- Part of the difference is because of the different purpose of Argonaut and IPS.
- IPS ( in FHIR) is now considered also to be REST based, where you can retrieve seperate resources itself, for example immunizations.
- Oyvind Aassve mentions that Norway is building the National Infrastructure on this principal which approach the IPS as much as possible. However you still can deliver the resources in a bundle.
- Argonaut has a longer list of "must support " items.
- IPS is explicit on statements on negation.
- In the REST architecture of Argonaut the asssumption is, that no information will be returned if the data is absent, i.e. there are no allergies.
- Stephen Kay expresses his worry how to solve the differences between IPS and Argonaut, because they have 2 different purposes. Who is going to use the IPS?