HL7 update from WG meeting Jan 2015

HL7 acronyms:

FHIR – fast healthcare interoperability resources

PA – patient administration

PHER – public health emergency response

WG – work group

ADT – admit discharge transfer

Hi folks,

After a few days wrestling the process issues of HAVE being “endorsed” by HL7 this week, there are a number of questions/comments I wish to relay:

1. PHER voted to “not object” if PA wanted to take over sponsorship of the Project Scope Statement (PSS).

2. PA voted to take on the effort (it has not been determined if PHER will have an ”interested party” role). After several discussions with the HL7 CTO, PA was a good choice because they have scheduling and ADT already, so this is a good fit. It also needs to touch FHIR and PA is already working closely with FHIR.

3. While PA is willing to take this on, they cannot be ready for a May ballot as they have critical work to do for FHIR that will not allow them the resources before then to take on additional work.

4. During the introduction quarter with PA, we reviewed the draft PSS John Roberts (PHER) and I drafted and socialized with the PHER co-chairs over the past few weeks. We made a few changes to it in PHER then in PA made more changes. There are still a number of procedural questions to include:

a. What is the process to “endorse” a standard from another SDO (no one seems to have that answer)

b. While we have a good SOU for TEP and updates to include a HAVE “endorsement” no one seems to know what an endorsement really looks like. What will be produced? What is the value? Why? Etc.

c. Everyone seems to think we will need to have both SDOs do their full review process and HL7 would actually ballot the Spec. Then – does that mean a joint product? Joint copyright?

d. There are many questions still to be answered on the SDO front.

5. The good news is all members of PA think it is a worthwhile effort and that it fits in their WG. Members from Netherlands and Australia were particularly interested. Alexander for NE showed an “award winning” dashboard where they currently post this information in their country. It is a web portal though with no automation. Mike from AU said this is just what he has been looking for as his company has products on both ends but no “standard” message in between. CA also had interest. While the enthusiasm was good – they also asked some very good questions we need to answer. For example – what vocabulary was used initially? Was this from CDA at some point or “homegrown”? I know much of this came from HavBED but was not able to answer if and where the data items were documented within HL7.

6. During some of the comment resolution PA was doing on FHIR, they identified additional information that may need to be included.

My current thoughts:

7. We do our 60-day review as planned and try to identify any additional items needed from FHIR review and PA input.

8. After PR and comment resolution, we hold HAVE as a CS like we did TEP

9. In May while Werner is at HL7, he work with PA on any additional issues they have. HL7 will run a Sept ballot where PA will have some time to do a very thorough review and reconciliation. If there are changes we must incorporate to HAVE we do so and run another short review, vote another CS then go for Standard ratification.

10. Over the next month we will continue to work the final SOU and determine between the SDOs how best to do this – it could be a joint document but don’t want to speculate on that yet.

11. I have provided those at the meeting the public link to the WD02 (thanks Darrell) and let them know we would post to their full WG the actual public review draft when it comes out of TC admin.

12. We should soon provide an answer about where the vocabulary originated.

13. NE noted another problem that must be addressed – methodology? V2, V2+, V3, FHIR – They stated the risk in the PSS as: Methodological incompatibilities between the structures and terminologies supporting the specification which may compromise interoperability. This will require more discussion.

14. FYI - PA meets most Mondays at noon PT

Just wanted to pass this along while it is fresh on my mind. Probably best to pick a topic for a discussion thread on the list. Otherwise, we can just address these topics at the next HAVE meeting.

Cheers,

Elysa Jones

emergency-have message