Minutes - Referral WG 2021-12-21

From Health Level 7 Belgium Wiki
Attendees
  • Dr Alain Derom
  • Bart Decuypere
  • Frederik De Kegel
  • Filip Migom
  • Hans De Keersmaecker
  • Jean-Michel Polfiet
  • Joost Van Averbeke
  • José Costa Teixeira
  • Karlien Erauw
  • Kristof Jaubin
  • Lotte Adriaensen
  • Nico Vannieuwenhuyze
  • Olivier Lothaire
  • Philippe Cauchie
  • Tom Fiers
  • Tom Tollenaere
Excused/Not present
  • Alexis Van Zeveren
  • Benny Verhamme
  • Frédéric Istace
  • Frederik Lenaerts
  • Jos Bellen
  • Mieke Buckinx
  • Nick Hermans
  • Paul Neyens
  • Peter Laridon
  • Robert Nicolas
  • Theo Schumacher
  • Thibault Mahieu
  • Toon Schiemsky
  • Richard Francken
  • Stefan Waegemans
  • Werner De Mulder
Agenda
  • Rework on issues resulted from the pilot phase, issues #48 and #50 having priority
Minutes
  • Up-to-date list of issues can be consulted here
  • CHU Charleroi did a succesfull import of a FHIR message, decoding will start
  • Visualisation tool is public and URL is available: drag and drop of FHIR file is possible - uncheck validation of file button as there is a bug
  • New issue from last week #issue 59: Create NamingSystem for BIS numbers
  • patient identification: checked with eHealth platform
  • art 8 from eHealth platform law and mapped with the BCSS law: all info passing the eHealth platform must use the NISS info from patient, the NISS is identifier at the nat'l security, can be RN number if this exists ; if not existing in RN then BIS number is created. See more here
  • no need to create a new Naming System as NISS can be RN or BIS number
  • BIS can be created by Fedasil or nat'l scty or GP
  • will there be FHIR messages without a NIS number ? There are now data in labs without NIS number. If there is no NIS then data are not shared
  • patient data are sent not by eHealth infrastructure if there is not a NIS number
  • Can we send a FHIR message without NISS number ? It is possible if sent the eHealthBox to the GP. Lab will use own identification from his system.
  • Issue : how to deal with comments - new issue encountered, not in github yet
  • protocol 49: series of tests that are not accredited, some of them having comments. the only way to encode this is
  • text "analyse gedekt door accreditatie" comes with every analysis
  • some tests have biological relevance, some have not, they are mixed. Visualisation tool only shows 1st comment currently.
  • does it make sense to mix info like this ?
  • Belac requires to put info somewhere in a readable way. Currently there is no other way to put the comments but report becomes unreadable
  • make distinction b/w technically/clinically relevant & administrative/non-clinical comment
  • if we make extension it is at observation level not at observation interpretation level - seems that we need an extension, José will check with int'l FHIR lab group and will come up with a solution
  • issue 64 is newly created in github
  • additional issue with comments: comments having referenced values/referenced range/interval and alpha numeric values
  • see protocol 52
  • visualisation tool does not show these comments yet
  • comment that goes with referenced range f.e. normal values for diabetics/normal values for non-diabetics
  • issue 65 is newly created in github
  • Issue 21: copy physicians
  • reports not only indicate physician who ordered the lab tests, but may list other physicians in cc of lab results. We cannot find who to encode those in the FHIR message (i.e. we do not know where to put those). Do we not indicate this? Or if we do, where and how?
  • POC group proposes to put comment on service request/order level (plain text: copy result to GP...)
  • order is not digitised yet so is more for the future, there is no BeServiceRequest yet, note field at FHIR R4 service request profile
  • Issue 24: results in different units

Next Meeting: on Tuesday Jan 4 4PM