Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

eVote /

Date of vote

Submitted by Work GroupRequestProject Insight
Project ID
Comments or Concerns NotedOutcome / Date Attachments
(who voted)
Electronic Health RecordsFinancial ManagementImaging & IntegrationOrders & ObservationsPatient Administration
20180523Financial ManagementFHIR Implementation Guide for Coverage Requirements Discovery
FYI:  US Realm Specific
1428Da Vinci Project
OO votes affirmative, while supporting the comments made in FMG that:

• The timeline for normative ballots may be too aggressive in light of underlying resources’ normative trajectory.
• Not specific to this PSS, but any FHIR based IG – More clarity needs to be provided on FMM levels and which FMM level is considered an STU vs. Draft vs. something inbetween.  Based on progress, the target STU publication may not be quite at an STU level, but the PSS template does not accommodate FMM levels that would be more realistic.  Something to bring up in general with the TSC.
Approved Approved
Christol Green
No ResponseApproved
Paul Knapp
Approved
Brad Genereaux
Approved
Hans Buitendijk
Approved
Line Saele
20180604AttachmentsAttachments Frequently asked Questions (FAQ) living document1415Will require JPP with X12, WEDI and CMSApproved / 6/14/2018 Approved
Christol Green
No ResponseApproved
Paul Knapp
Approved
Michael Brody/Elliot Silver
Approved
Hans Buitendijk
No Response
20180913OOIHE Digital Pathology Workflow Metadata Requirements (e.g. DICOM) to Specimen DAM mapping and HL7 product family use The EHR WG co-chairs vote AFFIRMATIVE on the “IHE Digital Pathology Workflow Metadata Requirements (e.g. DICOM) to Specimen DAM mapping and HL7 product family use” PSS, but request that the authors of the PSS offer clarifications in response to the follow question:

Why does the PSS state that the Specimen DAM will map ONLY to v2 and not FHIR or CCDA? DAMs are supposed to be implementation neutral, correct? After reading this PSS, it seems that the authors desire to enhance/standardize the workflow involved in helping someone look at something quite small (namely, an image of what appears on a laboratory slide). The existing method (for this workflow) takes advantage of the fact that the thing (the slide or image) contains some well-developed clinical language that appears in existing HL7 V2 messages. Isn’t it true that the PSS authors’ goal is to normalize/standardize the workflow requests by examining the existing V2 messages? Is so, then they hope to ensure that the DAM fully accommodates all of the required message-elements. Therefore, the end-product of their PSS project will be an updated DAM – and it will NOT be an updated message-transport-definition (that is, a better V2 message, V3 message, CDA-message, or FHIR-message), correct?

Response: (Riki)
John,
I will add some explanatory text:

We limited this particular PSS to:
#1 updating the DAM and
#2 v2 constructs, becasue that is what we plan on using in the IHE profile or Digital Pathology
For this project we did not also want to add in time to update FHIR resources or CDA, however becasue we updated the DAM that should ost certainly be used when updated to those product lines are needed for related use cases.
Let me now, if this addresses the comment and I will ensure that the PSS is updated before bringing to TSC.

Approved /

9/21/2018

 Approved
Christol Green
Approved w/ comment
John Ritter
Approved
Kathleen Connor
Approved
Elliot Silver
Approved
Patrick Loyd

Approved

Line Andreassen Sæle

20181017Patient AdministrationHL7 Version 3 Standard: Personnel Management, Release 1 will reach its 5-Year anniversary since being approved by ANSI on 2014-04-111456

Reaffirmation Ballot

 

http://www.hl7.org/special/Committees/projman/searchableProjectIndex.cfm?action=edit&ProjectNumber=1456

Approved

25 Oct 2018


 

Approved

Christol Green


No Vote.

Abstained

 

Approved

Kathleen Connor

 

Approved
Elliot Silver

 

Approved

OO, not sure who - see email

 

Approved

Line Andreassen Sæle

20181017Patient AdministrationHL7 Version 3 Standard: Patient Administration; Patient Registry, Release 1 will reach its 5-Year anniversary since being approved by ANSI on 2014-12-121455

Reaffirmation Ballot

 

http://www.hl7.org/special/Committees/projman/searchableProjectIndex.cfm?action=edit&ProjectNumber=1455


Approved 25 Oct 2018

 

Approved

Christol Green

No Vote. Abstained

 

Approved

Kathleen Connor

 

Approved
Elliot Silver

 

Approved

OO, not sure who - see email

 

Approved

Line Andreassen Sæle

20181017Patient AdministrationHL7 Version 3 Standard: Scheduling, Release 2 will reach its 5-Year anniversary since being approved by ANSI on 2014-12-121457

Reaffirmation Ballot

 

http://www.hl7.org/special/Committees/projman/searchableProjectIndex.cfm?action=edit&ProjectNumber=1457

Approved 25 Oct 2018

 

Approved

Christol Green

No Vote. Abstained

 

Approved

Kathleen Connor

 

Approved
Elliot Silver

 

Approved

OO, not sure who - see email

 

Approved

Line Andreassen Sæle

20181211Financial ManagementTargeted industry survey regarding US coverage requirements discovery for Durable Medical Equipment.

The HL7 FM is engaged in efforts with multiple industry stakeholders in supporting the development of standards-based electronic health data exchange services to determine coverage and documentation requirements in the US. To better understand readiness in the field to implement this approach and its future feasibility for ordering durable medical equipment (DME), we are gathering input from EHR vendors and other industry partners on these efforts.


The PSS is located at:

https://confluence.hl7.org/display/FM/PSS+for+HL7+FM+Survey%2C+last+updated+2018+12+11?src=contextnavpagetreemode

(Color legend for the PSS is:  Yellow are those boxes we completed, green needs to be completed)

 

Example of the DRAFT Survey Introduction and Survey are located at: https://confluence.hl7.org/download/attachments/30638450/CPI%20DME%20eRx%20Payer%20Pilot%20Survey_Intro%20-%20MK.docx?api=v2

And https://confluence.hl7.org/download/attachments/30638450/Pilot%20survey_Payer_final_10-25_mk.docx?api=v2

Please note these are DRAFT and have NOT been approved by the WG at this time – they are work in progress, but we wanted to give the committee an idea of what we will be asking.

Approved

17 Dec 2018



13 Dec 2018

Approved

Christol Green

21 Dec 2018

Approved

Feliciano "Pele" Yu, Jr., MD, MSHI, MSPH, FAMIA


(email)

11 Dec 2018

Approved

Kathleen Connor


17 Dec 2018

Approved

Elliot Silver

13 Dec 2018

Approved

Riki Merrick and Lorraine Constable

12 Dec 2018


Approved

Line Andreassen Sæle

20181219Financial ManagementePayer Health Data Exchange (ePDx)

PSS is located at:  https://confluence.hl7.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=39158184

This project will define exchange methods (push, pull, triggers, subscription), use of other interoperability "standards" (e.g. CDS Hooks and SMART on FHIR) and specific use of FHIR resources to effectively exchange payer information regarding the current or previous care, including the provenance of the data, of one or more specific patients/members with a provider responsible for evaluating/specifying/ordering/delivering care for the patient.









20181224Imaging Integration

FHIRcast: Application Context Synchronization in FHIR


PSS is located at:  https://confluence.hl7.org/display/ASD/20181224+eVote

This project proposes the creation of a decentralized, web-based context synchronization specification. This specification will enable secure integration across different devices, systems, and/or, networks – not tie the user’s session to a single machine. This specification will natively enable synchronization of SMART on FHIR apps. Project scope is not limited to imaging integration.









  • No labels