Minutes - Referral WG 2021-12-07

draft

Attendees

draft

• Alexis Van Zeveren
• Dr Alain Derom
• Bart Decuypere
• Benny Verhamme
• Frédéric Istace
• Frederik Lenaerts
• Hans De Keersmaecker
• Jean-Michel Polfiet
• Joost Van Averbeke
• Jos Bellen
• José Costa Teixeira
• Karlien Erauw
• Kristof Jaubin
• Nick Hermans
• Nico Vannieuwenhuyze
• Peter Laridon
• Robert Nicolas (Medispring)
• Thibault Mahieu
• Tom Tollenaere
• Stefan Waegemans
• Toon Schiemsky

Excused/Not present

draft

• Frederik De Kegel
• Mieke Buckinx
• Olivier Lothaire
• Paul Neyens
• Richard Francken
• Theo Schumacher
• Tom Fiers

Agenda

• Rework on issues resulted from the pilot phase

Minutes

draft

• Up-to-date list of issues can always be consulted here
• Issue 19: unique identifier

• naming system would be created for unique identifier for the bundle - one for Belgium
• how do labs need to manage amendments of protocols?

• form of unique identifier
• uniqueness of identifier has to be at lab level

• one lab will do it in this way: protocol order number + version number of the protocol, can be prefixed by the RIZIV number of the lab

• Issue 40: ServiceRequest references

• an order creates a ServiceRequest - should ServiceRequests also be stored in the DiagnosticReport.basedOn ?

• it is not needed to duplicate the references, only put it in DiagnosticReport, if mentioned as suborders at Observation level

• Issue 28: notion of "sequence number" on specimen

• important is to be able to note unique ID of specimen, order of sampling is not useful/not relevant
• no action to be taken

• Issue 20: May url references to identifier systems be empty or dummy ?

• there must also be a url that identifies the system and has to be unique within the namespace it belongs to (per lab) but it can be dummy
• it cannot be empty
• see: "If the system is a URL, it SHOULD resolve. Resolution might be to a web page that describes the identifier system and/or supports look-up of identifiers. Alternatively, it could be to a NamingSystem resource instance. Resolvable URLs are generally preferred by implementers over non-resolvable URNs, particularly opaque URNs such as OIDs (urn:oid:) or UUIDs (urn:uuid:). If used, OIDs and UUIDs may be registered in the HL7 OID registry and SHOULD be registered if the content is shared or exchanged across institutional boundaries."

• should : recommended, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2119

• issue was resolved last week, nothing to be done

• Issue 42

• no action to be taken
• the precision that is mentioned in the FHIR message is the precision that is used by the lab

• Issue 29: notion of "specimen collected after x... min"

• LOINC has different codes, these should be used by the labs, if not, then the interval has to specified separately

• no action to be taken
• Issue 34

• was discussed previously
• if RETAM code exist, it must be used, see https://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-be/hl7-be-fhir-laboratory-report/guidance.html, 3.10.1 Use of Retam codes

• what with LOINC codes that are not in the RETAM table ? we should make a distinction b/w LOINC codes in RETAM table and the ones that are not - to create new issue on this so that we adapt the guidance
• issue 34 can be closed

Next Meeting: on Tuesday Dec 14 4PM