Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.




Meeting Information

The WG meets every Wednesday 2:30p-3:30p ET. (As of 8/14/19, WG will meet every other Wednesday)




Action Items


Reviewed the ADA's 1084 document and project intent/goals. Building out a timeline and schedule of expectations was discussed during this meeting.

  1. Socialize this WG with the dental community to see who can participate
  2. Socialize within DoD (Molly Jenkins, Kevin Parker, Steve..) --Russ sent email to Nancy 8/15
  3. Create timeline/roadmap --WIP: Manisha drafting
  4. Create a requirements list of data elements mapped to C-CDA --ongoing


Updates from Russ: Attachments WG's new WG name is PPIE (Payer/Provider Information Exchange). We need 2 more implementors before PSS approval. DoD is the only one so far. 

It was emphasized that logical groupings of dental information should remain separate (odontal, implantable devices, etc).

Reviewed the xls spreadsheet to explain intent for mapping data to C-CDA.

  1. WG to identify two additional implementors for this effort. VA or the Legacy Army are possible POCs
  2. Post new WIP sheet?
  3. Set up meeting (8/13) with PPIE group for project approval


Meeting canceled


Russ reiterated to the WG the project intent and scope. Karen Clark, DSS presented a DENTRIX use case scenario which allowed the group to gain better context on defining and collecting dental data from an EHR.

There were some data elements that are not listed in the 1084; the group mentioned collecting the "to-be" data elements during requirements gathering for CCD dev. 

DENTRIX can grab CCD data now, but the intent for this project is to see how we can add those additional dental data elements within a structured framework. 

There was also a brief discussion on utilizing a FHIR connection vs. building a CCD This is a thought for consideration (but will push forward with CCD for now). 

  1. Need to have someone from Henry Schein on the WG call.
  2. Push for more federal representation on this call. Russ to speak to IPO.
  3. Create timeline draft.


Greg, Russ, Manisha, Joel, Jean, Angie, Eric, Tony, LT Col Ford, CDR Stallings

Reviewed high level timeline and group approved. Once we get vendor perspectives, we can solidify timeline. 

There was some discussion around the nuance of focusing on CCD or FHIR for the IG version but in some respect can be interchangeable. Open for discussion with the vendors as well.

Shared the current spreadsheet and determined: out of 477 total data elements, 218 can be mapped to CDA; 258 will need structure. 

Noted that this WG progress will be discussed during Wed-Q1 at HL7 WGM in Atlanta.

  1. Follow up with Will about Henry Shein participation.
  2. Gather vendors for perspective on timeline and implementation format (CDA, FHIR)


Greg, Manisha, Jack (last name?), Eric Kirnbauer, Joel Bales, CDR Stalling, LT Col Kevin Parker, Jean Narcisi, Chris Brancato, Carla Evans, Karen Clark, Michael (last name?)

Greg reviewed the PSS and excel spreadsheet for new attendees. A question proposed was if CCDA is preferred over FHIR and it was mentioned that CCDA might be a better fit right now. 

Jean had a conversation with HL7's CEO, Chuck Jaffe, that potentially after balloting a first final of Dental Summary IG, joining this effort into the FHIR Accelerator Program would be a consideration (if it fits well). 

  1. Compile slide deck for HL7 WGM, send draft to Greg and Jean for review.

9/17/19 (WGM)

Dental discussion occurred during Tues Q1 of PIE WG. Greg and Russ presented the Dental Summary Exchange Overview slide deck. 

Russ pointed that finalizing Ortho IG is top priority but will work simultaneously with this effort. 

HL7 is pushing for dual IG's (CDA and FHIR), so consider the strategy for that.

  1. Add ortho IG data elements (or note them) in Dental Summary Exchange mapping file.

2. Finalize what WG should review the PSS of this project (PIE, Patient Care, both?)

3. Consider FHIR R5 release when mapping to FHIR.


Tony Magni, Jean Narcisi, Chris Brancato, Greg Zeller, Russ Ott, Col William Baez, LtCol Tansel Acar, LTC Kevin Parker, CDR Steve Stallings, LtCol Jeff Ford, Bob Cox (CDS), Eric Kirnbauer (Tesia), Susan Langford

CDS cannot yet provide a CDA summary document

Henry Schein and DSS were involved in the development of the 1084

DSS and Henry Schein can both produce a CCD today

Col Baez - we've had some challenges with the FHIR interface between Dentrix and Millennium

  • Perhaps Dentrix could test this in a smaller sphere, and then port it over to the DoD space
  • What they do to configure or manipulate Dentrix enterprise has to go through the PEO DHMS
  • For us, "we can get to yes faster with CCDA" than trying to do something with FHIR

LTC Parker

  • Henry Schein has produced a CCD that goes to the JLV

Col Baez - we only view stuff within the JLV, but we'd like to be able to store data

  • "I am really eager to provide a use case for this"
  • This wouldn't only be for active duty, but requirements would be provided with them
  • If someone was seen at a community provider location, and they could provide an essential dental record, we could add it to the record
  • Also if someone were to newly become Active Duty, we'd want to capture their Dental status and history
  • This is an opportunity to standardize the baseline information exchanged between dental providers
  • Sometimes people are authorized for a limited set of treatments - that they didn't get billed for extra care.


  • I'm not sure that we have a way to show the progress of Periodontal status is over time
  • The caries risk and caries rate is something that the profession has some agreement

Bob (CDS) - We could do sandbox creation and testing of a CCD fairly quickly - within a few months

Col Baez - the focus should be on the Dental provider focus, rather than a Dental payer focus

Russ - For the next meeting - we'll review the data elements from the 1084 that map to the baseline C-CDA, and

Greg - If we start with simple straight-forward use cases to build from, that will help us get to meaningful pilots in short term.

Col Baez - the dental referral use case is a common one that is not unique to the military space.

Greg - from a perspective of readiness, the military has a very specific scale of readiness

LTC Parker - the 3 services need to get agreement on what they'll

Col Baez will provide draft use cases with sample data that would be important to convey as part of a Dental Referral/Transition of Care scenario


Russ, Greg, Manisha, Jean, LCDR Bohman, CDR Stalling (BUMED), Joel Bales, Courtney Panaia-Rodi, Eric Kirnbauer, Carla Evans, Craig, Susan Langford, Robin Isgett, LT Col Kevin Parker, Dave DeRoode, Chris Johnson (BCBS)

Administrative items:

  • The PSS was approved 10/8/19 by the US Realm Steering Committee. They requested a few clarifications to be added to the PSS language: that not only the CDA template will be created but also FHIR. Other committees that need to approve are the administrative steering division and the technical steering committee.
  • Doodle poll to be sent out for future weekly meetings (changing to weekly vs biweekly). Last Wednesday meeting will be 10/16/19 (230-330pm ET). 

Review of Col Baez' use case document:

Russ introduced the document content to the group and noted that we should highlight where in each use case does the transfer of data occur. We then can identify where in the CCD that does or should be, discuss implications or details of that data, and comparison to the 1084 for sanity check on appropriateness of data sets. These use cases are also helpful for implementation example when it comes time to publish IG for ballot.

The group started looking at the requirements xls to start the ground work. Discussions include:

1) InformationRecipient: facility type code and facility type. it was noted from a federal rep that this information would be good to have, even if it's unavailable now. Need to determine if dental is included in Location identifiers: SDLOC and HSLOC in CDA.

2) ReceivedOrg: Russ stated that in CDA there is no designation for Organization address or phone. He will take this back to the HL7 community to see if we did want to include it, where could be stored.

3) LegalAuth, assigned entity, id: question if this is one person within the dental world? decided to parking lot this one. (there is some debate on how much we want to shift examples like this for implementors).

4) DocumentationOf. service event, performer: (the care team that directly aligns to the care plan of the given patient). Dental provider types ARE included in VSAC for provider identification in CCDA.

  1. Check with HL7 community on where facility address and phone number (under receiving org) could exist (Russ)
  2. Check to see how facility type code and code would be modeled IF separate from SDLOC and HSLOC (Russ)
  3. Work on the list of facility types (Russ sent CDA list for reference) (Col Parker)
  4. Doodle poll sent to email distro 10/9/19. Finalize new day/time on 10/16. (Manisha)


Greg, Jean, Russ, Manisha

CDR Stalling, Joel Bales, Carla Evans, Robin Isgett, Rebeka Fiehn, Michael Honeycutt, Kipp Clemmons (DSS), Lt Col Jeff Ford, Chris Brancato, Col Baez, LCDR Bohman, David DeRoode

  1. Context around Encounter (single or multiple): discussion landed on a suite of procedures, by performers (multiple), care plans, etc. Confirmation that detail care plan to be built out in spec.
  2. Purpose as defined in 1084. what information is or should this convey and how is it used by recipient of document?
  3. Problems - what terminologies will be used to convey problems? ---did not finalize (question)(question)
  4. Procedures - discuss HL7 way of defining procedures (procedures vs. observations vs. acts) ---did not get to 


NEW date/time series: Mondays 1-2pm ET

Agenda: detailing out how the summary will be exchanged:

  • What will likely happen in the Dental EHR before summary creation
  • What action will actually trigger the summary creation (and who takes this action)
  • How the summary will be transmitted to the desired recipient
  • What exactly the receiving organization will do with the summary upon receipt