Minutes - Patient Dossier WG 2023-10-05

Attendees

• Anne Nerenhausen
• Alexis Van Zeveren
• Félix De Tavernier
• Hanne Vuegen
• Hans De Keersmaeker
• Jean-Michel Polfliet
• Pablo Christiaens
• Veerle Michiels
• Wouter De Jonghe

Excused

• Bart Decuypere
• Brecht Van Vooren
• Filoretta Velica
• Isabelle Pollet
• Jens Penny
• José Costa Teixeira
• Karlien Erauw
• Nick Hermans
• Philippe Baise
• Sam Jocqué
• Tom De Backer
• Walter Bollaert

Agenda

• Resolve issue/questions

Minutes

• The business rules document can be found here in NL and here in French:

• see also in issue 12

• The work on the implementation guide has been updated

• issue 1 refers to the work on the logical model
• master branch
• if no comments come in, these will be merged

• We will go over the issues, see here

• issue 13 representative linked to willcode:
• it might be useful to be able to put one representative for all will codes, other info might be useful

• issue 11: consent.scope relation vs consent.provisioncode

• the will code will be made mandatory in the logical model as this corresponds with the most important information, it corresponds with consent provision code in FHIR
• the category is FHIR int'l model is mandatory and is very similar to scope
• more investigation is necessary by eHealth platform

• issue 10: performer vs organisation

• the representative (mandaathouder) is in the logical model but not in the IG yet --> it is the custodian
• where do we get the INSZ number for a notary/judge ?
• do we need another type of representative ? trusted person?
• can the custodian be the same person as the performer ? normally not
• concepts and business rules need to be clarified by INAMI

• we create a new issue 14 : the group thinks that the notary document might have to be availabe at the HCP side, could we link ? to be investigated and specified in

• We will go over the issues, see here

• issue 14: should we make a link for wills registered elsewhere

• a link can be cumbersome if the link does not work in an emergency case but has advantages ; a link will not be allowed, a scan looks better as all (must be specified, f.e. a pdf)
• the official document is not mandatory, for euthanasia the offical document is at the city level
• organ donation: a scan should be indeed better, as this is not an official document, only an agreement ; Anne will check if we will make this mandatory
• the business rules will describe the situations where the documentscan is preferred

• issue 8: kmehr/FHIR mapping

• for all existing documents in kmehr and the valuesets used there, a mapping to the FHIR valuesets is needed
• how are we going to tackle this ?

• see 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 in the business rules WillCategory and WillCode
• we will only add values to the existing kmehr values

• it seems that some kmehr values have been removed and some have not been mapped

• FHIR mapping: Category (logical) should not be mapped on Scope (FHIR) and Willcode (logical) should not be mapped on Category (fhir)

• Alexis prefers to have this in a FHIR concept map

• we need user friendly tools to support this

• Next actions:

• continue resolution of issues & review of IB

Next Patient Dossier/Patient Will WG meeting: 19 Oct Sep at 9AM