Difference between revisions of "Minutes - Referral WG 2022-09-22"
From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
KarlienErauw (talk | contribs) |
KarlienErauw (talk | contribs) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
=== Excused === | === Excused === | ||
| + | * Bart Reekmans | ||
| + | * José Costa Teixeira | ||
* Geert Vandenhole | * Geert Vandenhole | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* Pieter Devolder | * Pieter Devolder | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
* resolution of issues | * resolution of issues | ||
=== Meeting Minutes === | === Meeting Minutes === | ||
| − | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/144 Issue 144]: a PSS application will be used, if this if followed the number has to be mentioned, if this is not followed the rejection reason has to be mentioned | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/144 Issue 144]: a PSS application will be used, if this if followed the number has to be mentioned, if this is not followed the rejection reason has to be mentioned ; extension for GuidanceResponse is accepted, subject to changes in the mapping |
| − | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/ | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/143 Issue 143]: Can CoPrescriber.status be adapted in logical model to 1-1 ? should indeed be adapted to 1-1 |
| − | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/ | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/137 Issue 137]: related to business rules V0.13 (see * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/128]: CoPrescriberNumer has been added, relates to the number of coprescribers that have to co-sign, mandatory/recommend/for info only, explained in 2.2.10 of the business rules. Has to be added to the logical model, has to be checked with concrete cases, see suggested solution in issue #126 |
| − | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/ | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/136 Issue 136]: resultReceiver in logical model. Result receiver indicates whether the prescriber needs feedback from the prescription's referral. Mandatory or optional has not been indicated. Preference goes to optional but the decision is postponed and will be re-discussed upon new version of the business rules |
| − | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/135 Issue 135]: problemCode cardinality: can we accept a prescription without any diagnose specified ? For some prescriptions it is required , for others it is not. Therefore it must be optional. Exact rules will be added to the business rules. | |
| − | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/133 Issue 133]: intendedPerformer startdate in logical model, performer start and end date are not known in advance so logical model has to be changed | |
| − | * | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/132 Issue 132]: intendedPerformer.performer: only one performer is allowed : even in draft stages, there must always be a performer (discipline) in the prescription, so the cardinality will be 1..*. This will be adapted. |
| − | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/131 Issue 131]: duplicate of 132 | |
| − | + | * [https://github.com/hl7-be/referral/issues/130 Issue 130]: prescriptionNumber, has to be checked with the backend team (UUID is a technical concept, prescription ID always exists) | |
| − | : | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
''' Agenda next meeting''' | ''' Agenda next meeting''' | ||
* review issues | * review issues | ||
| − | '''Next meeting : Thursday | + | '''Next meeting : Thursday Oct 13 at 4PM''' |
Latest revision as of 17:44, 11 October 2022
Contents
Attendees
- Anne Nerenhausen
- Bart Decuypere
- Benjamien Schmitt
- Hans De Keersmaecker
- Jean-Michel Polfliet
- Karlien Erauw
- Maarten Cobbaert
- Marleen Van Eygen
- Philippe Baise
- Richard Francken
Excused
- Bart Reekmans
- José Costa Teixeira
- Geert Vandenhole
- Pieter Devolder
Agenda
- resolution of issues
Meeting Minutes
- Issue 144: a PSS application will be used, if this if followed the number has to be mentioned, if this is not followed the rejection reason has to be mentioned ; extension for GuidanceResponse is accepted, subject to changes in the mapping
- Issue 143: Can CoPrescriber.status be adapted in logical model to 1-1 ? should indeed be adapted to 1-1
- Issue 137: related to business rules V0.13 (see * [1]: CoPrescriberNumer has been added, relates to the number of coprescribers that have to co-sign, mandatory/recommend/for info only, explained in 2.2.10 of the business rules. Has to be added to the logical model, has to be checked with concrete cases, see suggested solution in issue #126
- Issue 136: resultReceiver in logical model. Result receiver indicates whether the prescriber needs feedback from the prescription's referral. Mandatory or optional has not been indicated. Preference goes to optional but the decision is postponed and will be re-discussed upon new version of the business rules
- Issue 135: problemCode cardinality: can we accept a prescription without any diagnose specified ? For some prescriptions it is required , for others it is not. Therefore it must be optional. Exact rules will be added to the business rules.
- Issue 133: intendedPerformer startdate in logical model, performer start and end date are not known in advance so logical model has to be changed
- Issue 132: intendedPerformer.performer: only one performer is allowed : even in draft stages, there must always be a performer (discipline) in the prescription, so the cardinality will be 1..*. This will be adapted.
- Issue 131: duplicate of 132
- Issue 130: prescriptionNumber, has to be checked with the backend team (UUID is a technical concept, prescription ID always exists)
Agenda next meeting
- review issues
Next meeting : Thursday Oct 13 at 4PM
