Facilitator: Peter Gunter
Scribe: Robin Isgett
Attendees
Present | Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|---|
| x | Peter Gunter | |
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | @Shiwani | |
| x | @Archana Srinwason | |
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | @Andrea Preisler | |
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | @Mary Winter | |
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | ||
| x | Chris Johnson |
Antitrust Statement
Professional Associations, such as HL7, which bring together competing entities are subject to strict
scrutiny under applicable antitrust laws. HL7 recognizes that the antitrust laws were enacted to promote
fairness in competition and, as such, supports laws against monopoly and restraints of trade and their
enforcement. Each individual participating in HL7 meetings and conferences, regardless of venue, is
responsible for knowing the contents of and adhering to the HL7 Antitrust Policy as stated in §05.01 of
the Governance and Operations Manual (GOM).
Agenda Topics
Agenda Outline | Agenda Item | Meeting Minutes from Discussion | Decision Link |
|---|---|---|---|
Management | HL7 ANSI Anti-Trust Policy HL7 adheres to the ANSI Anti-Trust policy. We should avoid sharing any information on this call that could be interpreted as anti-competitive. If there are topics that you don’t normally speak about in other public settings, such as conferences or trade shows, then it’s probably best to save those topics for another time as this is a public call. If you have any questions you can refer to the GOM section 05.01 or consult your companies legal division. | Peter read Anti-Trust statement. | |
| Management | Chris Johnson moved to approve minutes and Chris Cioffi seconded. Minutes approved by consent. | ||
| Management | New Proposals and PSS for review - PIE comments of interest | PSS-2186 Analyzing top ten exposures and possible LOINC codes within the EHR systems between VA and DOD. Commented that PIE WG is interested party and to receive updates. | |
| Reminders | 2023 May Announcement of Formation of Consensus Group
Important Note: Consensus group signup closes when ballot voting begins. Consensus group enrollment will be available from a date at least four weeks preceding the ballot vote opening date and will continue until the opening of voting. While the exact dates are dependent upon individual ballot open and close dates, in general the consensus group signup period dates are as follows:
| Reviewed reminders. | |
| Management |
| Reviewed ballots. Several have been postponed. There are several FHIR implementation guides that may be of interest to the PIE WG. | |
| Management | This is a request for your HL7 comments on ONC’s Draft USCDI Version 4. A number of Work Groups have been formulating responses. We look forward to your feedback by April 6. Please send comments to tgerber@hl7.org. Official comments are due to ONC by April 17 and they will release the final USCDI v4 in July 2023. Draft USCDI Version 4 includes 20 new data elements and one new data class. Particular focus is on equity, diversity, and access to healthcare. Note, comments on the Interoperability Standards Advisory (ISA) are also received on a rolling basis in addition to a late summer/early fall comment period, so if you have any feedback on the ISA at this time, you can include that as well. Relevant information and links that will help you are below. Draft USCDI Version 4 Current USCDI information can be found at: https://www.healthit.gov/isa/united-states-core-data-interoperability-uscdi https://www.healthit.gov/isa/united-states-core-data-interoperability-uscdi#draft-uscdi-v4 A narrative overview of changes in Draft USCDI Version 4 can be found at: https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/page/2023-01/Standards_Bulletin_2023-1.pdf Interoperability Standards Advisory (ISA) ISA Full information about the ISA contents and items can be found at: https://www.healthit.gov/isa/isa-document-table-contents
| ISA Full information about the ISA contents and items can be found at: https://www.healthit.gov/isa/isa-document-table-contents link to ISA Purpose The Interoperability Standards Advisory is meant to serve at least the following purposes: To provide the industry with a single, public list of standards and implementation specifications that can be used to address specific health information interoperability needs in the United States. Currently, the ISA is focused on interoperability for sharing information between entities and not on intra-organizational uses. To reflect the results of ongoing dialogue, debate, and consensus among industry stakeholders when more than one standard or implementation specification could be used to address a specific interoperability need, discussion will take place through the ISA public comments process. The web-version of the ISA improves upon existing processes, making comments more transparent, and allowing for threaded discussions to promote further dialogue. To document known limitations, preconditions, and dependencies as well as provide suggestions for security best practices in the form of security patterns for referenced standards and implementation specifications when they are used to address a specific clinical health IT interoperability need. The ISA is designed to provide clarity, consistency, and predictability for the public regarding the standards and implementation specifications that could be used for a given clinical health IT interoperability purpose. | |
| Management |
| The VA commented on medical devices and were glad for the expansion. There may be a need for a second ID to track the software involved with the medical devices. Elevance has concerns regarding Privacy, SDOH, R7E alignment with the new Facility Information data class. Alix stated that USCDI comments are due by 04/17/23. Christol will add to agenda next week and send HL7 any comments on new or old elements. | |
| Management - Russ | PIE WG should prepare and approve an Errata Release to the IG to simply modify the cover page with the appropriate identifying version numbers so it’s easy to correlate with what’s in JIRA. We definitely want to eliminate multiple uses of the word "Release" in the title. If the document did get balloted once, then I also would be in favor of selecting v2.1.0 and doing the errata release to fix up the name and version of the document on the cover page. That would be a bit more work but would result in a higher quality solution. If PIE thinks this IG is going to start getting some good attention, it might be worth them doing an errata release to update the version info. Russ -I have a conflict 2:30-3:00pm, but I’ll join today 3:00-3:30pm.
| Version numbering as follows: 1st position - Major publication 2nd position - STU 3rd position - STU minor updates 4th position - Errata release EX: 2.1.0.1 What does the 3rd version position represent? If 2.1.0.1 2 = Prod Release, 1 = STU, 0 =update without ballot, 1 = Errata release 1 Per Russ Ott, This version is accurate: Yes - they confirmed that and took an action to update their documentation reflecting that scheme. So, for the attachments IG we’ll want to use that number (2.1.0.1). | |
| Completed Prior Authorization Comments | Both the PIE WG Interop 3 Prior Auth and the Attachments NPRM comments have been shared with HL7 leadership. However, we now can still add any new comments for Attachments with the extension on comment date of April 21th | Reminder. | |
| Open Floor | Connectathon/WG Meeting free educational sessions during first quarters. New format Workgroup meeting Plus. | Christol stated that the draft agenda was sent, room selections were requested and slide deck sent. WGM+ public facing agenda (that supplements the WG specific agendas): https://hl7.my.site.com/LightningMemberPortal/s/lt-event?id=a1Y7V00000YrACtUAN#/PLUS-Agenda | |
| Adjournment | Adjourned at 3:22 PM EST |
Supporting Documents
Outline Reference | Supporting Document |
|---|---|
| Minute Approval | |