Data type versions used Netherland has – not switched over to data type R2 using – R1 Care Record Re-affirmation – Query of the Care Record– Re-affirmation Care Transfer– Re-affirmation Discussion Clinical statement alignment Clinical statements are – common with CDA Normative edition of the RIM - Do we need to update to align with the latest? Will need to work this out as part of the re-affirmation. Last update was 2012. Was compatible then. Current implementations are using it how it is now. It might be prudent to do a gap analysis to see if anything is broken in the version of the RIM this is based on. Consider the following: Broken to effect patient safety and/or effect implementation The model used today does not have any issues with patient safety nor implementation issues. Suggest adding retention of the current clinical statement association to the PSS. Suggest adding to the paragraph section 3A – Vocabulary changes? is there a need to look at – vocabulary changes. Question raised with the implementers so see if they have encounter any vocab changes. Need to go through PC voting – First dead line is submitting the intent for ballot Michael will make update, email out, prepare the NIBS Michael adjusted PSS and discussed with PA Should not change issues around the modeling and data types Voting will be on next patient care call today – Motion to reaffirm the models Michael – Second Stephen – 0 abstain; 0- against; 4 - for – Medication Knowledge Project PSS – Pharmacy is asking PC to Co-Sponsor Michael replied to Melva Split the medication FHIR resource to be just about the compound information. The extra attributes will not go in a
Data type versions used – Netherland has not switched over to data type R2 – using R1 Care Record – Re-affirmation Query of the Care Record– Re-affirmation Care Transfer– Re-affirmation Discussion Clinical statement alignment – Clinical statements are common with CDA Normative edition of the RIM - Do we need to update to align with the latest? Will need to work this out as part of the re-affirmation. Last update was 2012. Was compatible then. Current implementations are using it how it is now. It might be prudent to do a gap analysis to see if anything is broken in the version of the RIM this is based on. Consider the following: Broken to effect patient safety and/or effect implementation The model used today does not have any issues with patient safety nor implementation issues. Suggest adding retention of the current clinical statement association to the PSS. Suggest adding to the paragraph – section 3A Vocabulary changes? – is there a need to look at vocabulary changes. Question raised with the implementers so see if they have encounter any vocab changes. Need to go through PC voting – First dead line is submitting the intent for ballot Michael will make update, email out, prepare the NIBS Michael adjusted PSS and discussed with PA Should not change issues around the modeling and data types Voting will be on next patient care call – today Motion to reaffirm the models – Michael Second – Stephen 0 – abstain; 0- against; 4 - for Medication Knowledge Project – PSS Pharmacy is asking PC to Co-Sponsor Michael replied to Melva Split the medication FHIR resource to be just about the compound information. The extra attributes will not go in a
PC_Co-Chair_Mtg_2017_10_23.docx