20170706_HL7_LabUSRealm_Notes
Attendees: Freida, Kathy, Craig, Erin, Riki, John R, Andrea, Hans, Carmen
LRI#132: For OBR-16 indicate that XCN_01 is required while XCN_02 is not supported. See the solution for LRI#105 and apply this to all of the elements where PH component affects datatype selection to GU profile
LRI#187: XON_O1.1 is listed as RE, but MUST be R for ORC-21= why not use XON_03 in ORC-21 for LRI_PH_Component – we are already using this in ORC-21 and OBX-23, so not needed anymore – review where XON_01 is used: NK1-13 for NDBS and PH – do we need to have name there, too? Yes for PH
Motion to change NK1-13: LRI_PH use XON_03 for NDBS_use either XON_01 or XON_02 – all other requirements match for NDBS and PH; all other profiles: optional – Riki, Erin; further discussion: clarification that this does not apply to NK1-2; used in PH for animal owners, when reporting on minors like for bloodlead, against: 0, abstain: 2, in favor: 6
LRI#108: change ELR to LRI_PH_Component – Motion to accept Riki, Craig, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 8
LRI#113: PID-29 comment – change cardinality from varies to [0..1] – also cannot drop the all other profiles usage = optional – motion to find not persuasive – Riki, Craig, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 8
LRI#115: similar approach – since all other profile usage is optional – motion to find not persuasive, Riki, Craig, no further discussion, against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: 8
LRI#124: one asking for clarification about the ordering provider – the filler needs to know the submitter, but PH wants to know who the provider is treating the patient, when they need to implement infection control – amount of time to get that information is too long right now
ORC-12 Ordering Provider Address – should be ORC-24 – typo – if not another comment, need to add as discovered item
In APHL for ARLN ETOR we created an ask at Order entry question for the healthcare facility of origin name and results receiver.
Option 1: no longer use ORC12/OBR-16 / ORC-21 etc but instead use PRT for submitter and
Option 2: keep ORC-12/OBR-16 / ORC-21 etc for the original provider and use PRT for all additional ones
Option 3: keep ORC-12/OBR-16 / ORC-21 etc for the current submitting provider and use PRT for all additional ones?
Often the labs do not get the original provider information – also a conflict of interest of handing over one lab’s client lists to competing organizations
For PH reporting – in life threatening situations the provider would get called and they need to also report
Do not make it required – but if the information is available need to have a standard way of sending that information
If we declare it RE, then ALL las have to be able to support it, or create a profile for the original provider.
Clear up what information needs to be conveyed in these data elements AND how to send original submitter information
Create guidance section on how to report original provider information and use option 3 for ordering provider information – this would apply to LOI as well as LRI – Kathy, Riki, no further discussion, against: 1, abstain: 0, in favor: 7 – persuasive with mod
Use join.me next week