Date: Tuesday 9/22/2020
Time: 2-3:30pm
Chair: Bryn Rhodes
Scribe: Howard Strasberg
CDS Hosted CQI
Agenda brought forward by CQI
- Clinical Reasoning Connectathon Report out and Project Update
- Gaps in Care Connectathon Report and Project Update
- Consider Attribution Resource (Linda Michaelsen)
- FHIR R5 Review/Prep
Meeting Minutes
- Combined CDS/CQI Minutes
- ClinicalReasoning update - Bryn
- Clinical Reasoning Update - 2020 Sep WGM.pptx
- Part of FHIR specification
- Use cases include sharing and evaluation
- Capabilities include expression logic, definitional resources and knowledge artifacts
- Bryn reviewed the quality improvement ecosystem diagram
- EBM on FHIR IG likely in the near future
- CPG on FHIR IG supports the representation of guideline content
- CDS Hooks supports integration with clinical systems
- Quality Measure IG describes how to construct quality measures
- DEQM - how to exchange the data of interest and report on measures
- Blue - CDS; Purple - CQI; Red - Public Health
- Three types of IGs
- Model IGs - e.g. QICore, USCore
- focused on data exchange within a particular realm
- Content IGs - e.g. HEDIS
- focused on publishing specific types of artifacts
- conform to a specification IG and draw from a model IG
- Specification IGs - e.g. DEQM
- focused on particular use cases
- derived from ClinicalReasoning module generally
- Connectathon report
- Test the ClinicalReasoning Module and related IGs
- Broad range of participants
- Testing focus
- Quality measure features
- PACIO data in a FHIR eCQM
- End-to-end gaps in care scenario
- Continued testing of Opioid IG via CDS Hooks
- MAT on FHIR
- Measure Authoring Tool
- Can export packages that conform to the Quality Measure IG
- Developer-assisted QDM-to-FHIR measure converstion
- Tested supplemental data with a variety of measures
- Continuous variable measures still have some kinks
- Tests pass in Atom but fail in reference implementation
- Evaluated stroke measure 104 with PACIO data
- Discovered issues posted to github, such as $collect-data and $evaluate-measure
- Gaps in Care - Yan Heras
- CQF-ruler reference implementation
- Mettles Solution's implementation
- End-to-end test scenario
- Gaps in care → DetectedIssue
- Tested end-to-end gaps in care reporting
- Tested using ATR group with care-gaps operation
- Discussed need for future enhancement of PopulationReference and DetectedIssue
- Identified places in spec that need clarification
- AEGIS Touchstone tested conformance of an implementation to the IG
- Ballot results for DEQM Release 1
- Passed
- 110 comments
- At first glance, no comments of high significance
- Discussion
- DetectedIssue - why wasn't it used in PDDI?
- Bryn - PDDI could potentially use it; PDDI is doing a report-out on Friday
- Rich Boyce - DetectedIssue was included in the last version; was tricky to do with CDS Hooks card response; most recent ballot used an alternative approach involving configurations
- DetectedIssue wasn't the focus of this DEQM ballot
- Gaps in Care_meeting_09172020.pptx
- Attribution resource discussion - Linda Michaelsen
- Use of DaVinci ATR to identify groups
- evaluateMeasure operation
- subject has primary relationship to primary practitioner
- Care-gaps operation
- people wanted the attributed provider and organization
- No true way to represent attribution in FHIR
- Patient.generalPractitioner
- Patient.managingOrganization
- However, sometimes a single patient will have attribution for different features
- May need to attribute by date, measure, topic, program or conditions
- Patient seen one or more times by a given practitioner during the performance period
- ATR IG doesn't specify how to get the members for a given NPI
- CAQH is developing exchange of attribution information between payers and providers - bulk and individual
- Provider would query the payer to see if the patient is attributed to them under any existing program
- Payer wants to send a list of all attributed patients to their providers once a month
- The context is value-based care rather than fee-for-service
- Cardinality
- One Attribution resource for each attribution?
- Related to patient or provider?
- Bryn - attribution to a particular provider; current Group resource may support this use case; ATR IG only uses Group in the instance case, but Group supports a definitional approach
- Group is based on provider; you would define the characteristics and the period and list the members
- Group.managingEntity only allows one value; PractitionerRole might work - includes both practitioner and organization
- Use of Group would align with ATR
- FHIR extension - Group definition profile in CPG lets you establish a group by dynamic expression
- Might use PractitionerRole as the managing organization
- Need for an Attribution Resource.pptx
- FHIR R4B/R5 discussion
- R4B in January 2021 - limited new resources with significant demand
- Medication definition resources, EBM-on-FHIR resources
- Can propose additional resources
- Initial R5 ballot towards the end of 2021; may be at least another year until it's published
- Which resources we'd like to see in R4B?
- EBM-on-FHIR resources
- MedicationDefinition
- Will changes to existing resources be included in R4B?
- R5 next steps
- Align with subscription changes
- Rename RequestGroup to RequestOrchestration
- Apply QA changes for maturity goals
- promotion candidates
- knowledge representation level and capabilities - sharable, computable, publishable, executable
- general purpose profiles
- Library, PlanDefinition, ActivityDefinition, Measure
- universally applicable guidance - e.g. using libraries, profiles, terminology
- Floyd - we are basing our current work on R4; when will people implement R5?; what about US regulatory requirement to use R4?
- Which other resources are going normative in R5?
- R4B content will also be included in R5
Action Items
{"serverDuration": 130, "requestCorrelationId": "9f83ca9ee232b0cc"}