Orders & Observations Conference Call
18-June-2009
Attendees:
Name / OrganizationAustin Kreisler / SAIC/CDC
Jonathan Harber / Blood Systems
Ken McCaslin / Quest Diagnostics
Rob Hausam / TheraDoc
Ed Tripp / Edward S. Tripp and Associates
Patti Larson / Wyndgate
Curt Safranek / Tomato Technologies
Ruth Berge / GE Healthcare
Bill Braithwaite / Anakam, Inc.
Hans Buitendijk / Siemens Healthcare
Patrick Loyd / GP Informatics
Note Takers: Hans Buitendijk
Agenda:
· Project Scope Statements
o Update from Steering Division decisions
§ All proposals distributed last week were accepted by the Steering Division with only minor changes.
o Blood Bank Project Proposal (Patti Larson)
§
§ V3 vs. V2
· The proposal is based on V2 as V3 is considered too challenging with the current availability of technical resources versed in V3 and the state of current implementations in this space. Therefore, V2 is seen as easier to progress the necessary work.
· Concern that if focus is beyond US Realm, then there may be pressure to do V3 rather then V2.
· If the project is tied to V2.8 it is not yet clear what the timeline is. Could be slower. V3 is typically very quick to DSTU.
· Can we find another facilitator given bandwith? Hans, Patrick, Jonathan, and Patti will follow-up after the meeting.
· Could somebody fund a resource with this skill?
§ Unclear whether this will yield new chapter or expand existing chapters.
§ Suggestion to move Project Intent – Other content to the Scope section.
§ We agreed to postpone a vote on this until next week.
o Specimen Process Step Project Proposal (Joyce Hernandez)
§
§ Joyce, Austin, and Hans will be working to update the project statement.
§ The expectation is that folks involved with both OO and CG will drive this effort under the auspices of OO.
§ As soon as we have an updated version, we will seek approval from OO to move this project for review to the Steering Division and TSC.
· Specimen Ballot Reconcilliation/NIB
o The ballot reconciliation complete.
o There is one outstanding item with Clinical Statement that if done now would require a new ballot round as it is substantive, or could wait for Version 2.
§ If we have one more round the content could still make it into the 2010 Normative edition
§ While Clinical Statement would like to keep everything in sync as much as possible, there always will be some times where normative material is not in sync with then current Clinical Statement.
§ It is up to the Specimen project to determine how critical it is to get the first normative content done now, or wait.
o Motion to defer the CS related item to Release 2 and therefore close out the current ballot. Ken McCaslin, Bill Braithwaite.
§ Against: 0; Abstain: 2; In Favor: 7
· Common Product Model Ballot Reconciliation
o We continued with some items in the spreadsheet (updated version attached, Disposition Comments include 18-Jun comments/resolutions), but could not continue far without the primary editors available.
§
Future Topics
· HITSP / OO – As needed
· June 25
o Query Profile for Immunizations – Rob Savage
o Specimen Segment Usage – Ruth Berge
o Inbound Results - Ruth Berge
§ I have a question about Results inbound. I am not certain of the interpretation of different triggers in Chapter 7 relating to unsolicited results. The issue is whether there is a message trigger that indicates that receiving system should check first for an order and create an order if there is no order. Is the Thursday group the proper group for this question?
o PCD questions on RQD, Give, PCA, etc. – Ruth Berge
o Composite Order Ballot Reconciliation
§
· July 9
o Joint session with Struc Doc on CDA R3 approach. Struc Doc Timeslot
· Date TBD
o Composite Order
o Clinical Event
o IHE External Lab Order
§ Update from Ruth
o Lab Result Topic Update
o Decision Making Document
§
V2.8 Proposal Status