Public Health and Emergency Response (PHER) SIG

Minutes of Organizational Meeting

05/05/2004San Antonio

Participants:

Last name / First name / Affiliation / email address / 5/5/04
Altamore / Rita / WA State Dept of Health / / x
Bounds / Susan / FDA / / x
Case / Jim / CAHFS/AMVA / / x
Davis / Bob / NAHDO/NCHS / / x
Eide / Dav A. / Group Health Cooperative / / x
Hammond / Ed / Duke / / x
Jernigan / Daniel / CDC /
Keating / Tamarind / PHII /
Loyd / Patrick / Oracle / / x
Lynch / Cecil / UC Davis/CA DHS / / x
McQuillen / Nancy / CA DHS / / x
Pollock / Daniel / CDC Atlanta / / x
Rashidee / Ali / AHRQ / / x
Reed / Dennis / PH SLO County, CA / / x
Russler / Dan / Patient Care TC / / x
Sastry / Chandan / Booz Allen Hamilton / / x
Schoenbrun / Benjamin / Booz Allen Hamilton / / x
Shakir / Abdul Malik / Shakir Consulting / / x
Stevens / Lise / FDA/CBER / / x
Taylor / Tajh / Booz Allen Hamilton / / x
Walker / Mead / MWC / / x
Willamston / Michelle / CDC/NCHS / / x
Zakharenkov / Alex / SIMI Group / / x

I.Agenda Items

List TCs and SIGs to work with

Identify organizational structure

Identify interim co-chairs

Discuss scope of SIG, including HL7 versions and domains

Delineate decision-making process

Create agenda for Atlanta meeting

Generate list of action items with assignments

Create SIG project plan/list of work products

II.Organizational structure/interim appointments

  • Number of co-chairs

Two are required; three or more make work easier. Discussion of domain-specific co-chairs – felt to be less important than skills to lead the group. Group approved three interim co-chairs: Jim Case,CAHFS, UC Davis;Dan Pollock, CDC; Rita Altamore, Washington State DOH.

  • Modeling facilitator

Group approved two modeling facilitators: Nancy McQuillen, CA Department of Health Services, and Patrick Loyd, Oracle Corporation: Theseindividuals will decide between them the division of labor and who will ultimately be responsible for maintaining the SIGs models. It is unlikely that the SIG will be doing any modeling prior to the September meeting. Other participation in MnM activities: conference call every Friday, harmonization meetings July and November, Thursday night facilitators’ roundtable and harmonization meeting at every WG meeting

  • Vocabulary facilitator

Unanimous approval of Cecil Lynch, CA Department of Health Services

  • Steward

Speaks for the SIG in harmonization meetings; SIG stewards have no vote. Unanimous agreement to allow any of the six previously-named individuals to act in that capacity, as most appropriate given a particular set of issues

III.Scope of SIG

Statement approved by ARB, TSC and BOD was read to group. Is available on the PHER SIG web page.

Scope-related issues identified as important by one or more members of the group are listed below.

  • Real-time instant messaging as part of emergency response. What should be the structure of such messages?
  • Geospatial/geographic standards. Should GIS-related work be the purview of a separate SIG? Use case: GIS vendor wants to accept HL7 messages, needs to know what we would send. Overlap between domains in GIS standards and HL7 standards revealed in NEDSS GIS work. Cancer surveillance/SEER identified as important consumer of geospatial information. XML SIG overlap – need to send vector graphics. Group agreed that this area should be explored as part of PHER initially. Emphasis on identification and endorsement of appropriate applicable existing standards, e.g., SDTS from USGS
  • Vital statistics messaging
  • Boundary with Community-based Health Care SIG
  • Boundary with Patient Safety SIG
  • Relationship with RCRIM – will PHER take over PORR?
  • If so, may want to discuss whether the PORR message is appropriately placed in the V3 structure?
  • Messages to and from handheld devices as part of emergency response or field investigation – PHER or LAPOCT?
  • Ensure that messages capableof sending denominator data are developed (related, among other things to EHR and to vital statistics)
  • Relationship with and usefulness of EHR work. Want to ensure that messages are developed that can express complex case information. Don’t work in opposition to their efforts.
  • Enhance newly-approved OPU message by adding geospatial information/segment
  • New/better messages for communicating food safety and environmental monitoring information
  • Unique relationship of PH to law enforcement, especially in relationship to BT
  • Need for PH to work with and communicate with a wide variety of non-health-care agencies (e.g., USDA). List enumerated in original SIG proposal
  • Will SIG work on V2 messages? Approved scope statement says yes. Should version 2 message development be done in SIG or in established TCs?
  • Mission and scope statement explicitly mentions only messaging. Is this intended to preclude work with CDA? General consensus was that it should not.[ra1]

IV.TCs and SIGs to work with[ra2]

  • Highest priority for joint session in Atlanta

a)Patient care TC (sponsor of PHER)

b)Community based health care SIG (scope boundary issues)

c)RCRIM TC (has current PORR message)

d)Patient safety SIG (scope boundary issues)

e)Government SIG

  • Other important groups

a)Modeling and Methodology TC (primary liaison through modeling facilitator)

b)Vocabulary TC (primary liaison through vocabulary facilitator)

c)OO TC (has new v2 OPU message)

d)Laboratory SIG

e)Laboratory, automated and point of care testing SIG

f)Electronic health records TC

g)XML SIG

h)Structured documents TC

i)Clinical decision support TC/clinical guidelines SIG/Arden syntax SIG

j)International health

k)Publishing

V.Decision-making process

Will be worked on by list/teleconference prior to Atlanta WG meeting

VI.Action item list

Resp = Responsible party. AMS = Abdul Malik Shakir; DR = Dennis Reed; JC = Jim Case; RA = Rita Altamore; TBD = to be determined

Item
Number / Date
Assigned / Resp / Description / Date Completed
PHER04-1 / 5/5/2004 / Done / Establish PHER meeting time in Atlanta Monday, September 27, Q 3 and Q4
[Question was raised as to whether this time conflicts with TC V2 work? [ra3]For many TC’s, yes -- but this is the only time available.] / 5/5/2004
PHER04-2 / 5/5/2004 / AMS / Talk with Jane Curry about new SIG and MnM liaisons
PHER04-3 / 5/5/2004 / JC / Establish listserv (done 5/14/2004). When available, send notice to SIG attendees. HL7 to announce on general HL7 list.[ra4]
PHER04-4 / 5/5/2004 / JC / Determine need for and/or frequency of conference calls[ra5]
PHER04-5 / 5/5/2004 / JC/DR / Decide on organization of PHER’s HL7 web site (done by HL7) / 5/14/2004
PHER04-6 / 5/5/2004 / JC / Determine meeting time and duration for Orlando meeting
Probably one full day; definitely at least one full day if any modeling to be done
Needs to be done beforeAtlanta meeting so we have a chance of getting rooms and time
Will conduct discussions on-line or on conference calls to determine exact request
PHER04-7 / 5/5/2004 / RA / Send Atlanta meeting information to HL7 by 05/21/2004 / 5/19/2004
PHER04-8 / 5/5/2004 / JC/RA / Establish agenda for Atlanta meeting. One definite item: create list of desired SIG work products and assign priorities. Send agenda to Peggy by deadline.
PHER04-9 / 5/5/2004 / JC/RA / [ra6]Outreach to International Health: contact IH group, individual invitations to county representatives. Suggestion: CBPH includes many international members; could ask them to invite their PH colleagues. RA met with International Affiliate chairs 5/6/2004.
PHER04-10 / 5/5/2004 / RA / Complete minutes, route for review. Send to HL7 headquarters by 06/21/2004 / 5/19/2004
PHER04-11 / 5/5/2004 / RA, JC / Establish joint sessions in Atlanta; follow established priorities (done 5/6/2004). New co-chairs meeting 0730 Thursday 05/06/2004 (RA attended). Send email to hosting co-chairs to confirm (done RA). / 5/19/2004
PHER04-12 / 5/5/2004 / RA / Explore opportunities for an informal session at upcoming PHIN conference (Atlanta, 05/24-27/2004)
PHER04-13 / 5/5/2004 / RA / Recruitment. Specific invitations to identified PHER-related organizational members of HL7.
PHER04-14 / 5/5/2004 / TBD / Announcement for next HL7 newsletter. Use wording from approved proposal?
PHER04-15 / 5/5/2004 / TBD / Liaisons with listed other TCs and SIGs
PHER04-16 / 5/5/2004 / TBD / Liaisons with PH partner organizations. All formal outside relationships must be approved by the HL7 BOD. PHDSC interested in acting as liaison with other PHL organizations.

Recorded by: Rita Altamore

Recorded date: 05/05/2004

PHER SIG meeting minutes 2004-05-05.docPage 1 of 6

[ra1]Given this, do we want to add Structured Documents to the list of TCs to work with?

[ra2]I’d also like to add the CDS/Guidelines/Arden complex. I think we will want to transmit messages relating to case classification and other decision rules.

[ra3]How should we follow up on this, if at all?

[ra4]Do we also want to send special invitations/notices to Patient Care/CBPH and RCRIM/PSSIG lists?

[ra5]Do we need more than one class of calls, perhaps on different schedules? Maybe an “executive” call among the six appointees, and also a general membership call?

[ra6]I added myself here, if you buy the individual invitations, I coule emulate the ones I’ll be doing to other organizational members