IHE Patient Care Coordination, Quality, Research, and Public Health, and IT Infrastructure met the last two days to discuss profiles and work for the 2015/2016 development cycle. You can find the minutes of PCC's meeting here, as well as the final evaluation spreadsheet we will be passing on to the technical committee for their review.
I'll make a few comments on this year's work items:
Radiology and Patient Care Devices have some work they'd like PCC's help with. From the PCD perspective, one of these simply a matter of documenting existing PCD and Continua efforts in a profile so that it can be tested in Connectathon for Home Health Monitoring. Another would make it easier for medical devices to communicate with some EHR systems, supporting the exchange of PCD-01 messages to a "Semantic Bridge" (fancy way of saying: Interface Engine) to translate it from one form (HL7 V2.6) to another form (e.g., C-CDA or maybe even FHIR) that might be more digestible for some EHR systems.
On the Radiology side, they'd like to see Remote Reading Workflow, and support for CDS during the imaging ordering process. For the former, we are thinking about XDW-based workflow profile, perhaps combining with another submission (Basic Testing Workflow), and updating the referral workflow profile. For the latter, I'm thinking this is something like what QRPH has already done with RFD and CRD. Except in this case, instead of getting back a form, you also have the option of simply getting back a token that says that the imaging procedure is authorized based on the data provided. This would take the place of getting back a form that asks for information needed to verify that the procedure is warranted, and eventually, that "authorization" token might be returned.
Finally there is the DAF proposal. This one is challenging. The basic ask is that we prepare an implementation guide for S&I Framework, but this really isn't an IHE International profile proposal. So we are looking at putting together something like a template for developing such a guide in IHE PCC, and then having IHE USA fill it in. So there'd be some joint work, but not an IHE Profile per se. The template work might need to be addressed by the DCC (Domain Coordination Committee), with some help from PCC.
These are of course, just my opinions; this is still my sabbatical year from chairing anything.
Keith
P.S. There's also some IHE/HL7 work that I'm going to be proposing once that joint workgroup gets officially established, but we still have some work to do there. That's another blog post.
I'll make a few comments on this year's work items:
Radiology and Patient Care Devices have some work they'd like PCC's help with. From the PCD perspective, one of these simply a matter of documenting existing PCD and Continua efforts in a profile so that it can be tested in Connectathon for Home Health Monitoring. Another would make it easier for medical devices to communicate with some EHR systems, supporting the exchange of PCD-01 messages to a "Semantic Bridge" (fancy way of saying: Interface Engine) to translate it from one form (HL7 V2.6) to another form (e.g., C-CDA or maybe even FHIR) that might be more digestible for some EHR systems.
On the Radiology side, they'd like to see Remote Reading Workflow, and support for CDS during the imaging ordering process. For the former, we are thinking about XDW-based workflow profile, perhaps combining with another submission (Basic Testing Workflow), and updating the referral workflow profile. For the latter, I'm thinking this is something like what QRPH has already done with RFD and CRD. Except in this case, instead of getting back a form, you also have the option of simply getting back a token that says that the imaging procedure is authorized based on the data provided. This would take the place of getting back a form that asks for information needed to verify that the procedure is warranted, and eventually, that "authorization" token might be returned.
Finally there is the DAF proposal. This one is challenging. The basic ask is that we prepare an implementation guide for S&I Framework, but this really isn't an IHE International profile proposal. So we are looking at putting together something like a template for developing such a guide in IHE PCC, and then having IHE USA fill it in. So there'd be some joint work, but not an IHE Profile per se. The template work might need to be addressed by the DCC (Domain Coordination Committee), with some help from PCC.
These are of course, just my opinions; this is still my sabbatical year from chairing anything.
Keith
P.S. There's also some IHE/HL7 work that I'm going to be proposing once that joint workgroup gets officially established, but we still have some work to do there. That's another blog post.
0 comments:
Post a Comment