Created by David McKillop, last modified by Brian Postlethwaite on 26 Aug, 2020

Date

Attendees

Minutes:

  • Proposed codes for NATA Accreditation, NATA site, and LSPN identifier types for the code system - HL7 Table 0203 (AU extension):

    CodeDisplayDefinition
    NATAANational Association of Testing Authority Accreditation NumberA National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) accreditation number associated with an accredited facility. A NATA accreditation number is associated with an organisation.
    NATASNational Association of Testing Authority Site NumberA National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) site number associated with an accredited facility. A NATA site number represents a specific location associated with an accredited facility, i.e. an organisation with a NATA accreditation number.
    LSPNLocation Specific Practice NumbersAn identifier assigned by Services Australia to uniquely identify practice sites that provide diagnostic imaging and radiation oncology services.
  • Healthcare Service After Hours Telecom

Mockup for a proposed set of values for the Contact purpose terminology for usage in the extension (similar to Organization.contact.purpose) to be attached to the ContactPoint datatype - specifically for use in the PractitionerRole.telecom and HealthcareService.telecom properties (or any others as needed).

Reviewing the Patient/RelatedPerson structure, these 2 use cases have the "purpose" covered in the relationship property, and thus don't require use of this extension. There is also discussion at HL7 international to modify the location and healthcareservice telecom properties to have similar capabilities.

Patient.telecom itself could have different purposes - though the values we're proposing likely wouldn't apply.

Summary: The proposed (slightly updated) valueset/codesystem looks good, but the context of using it is still under discussion.

Brian Postlethwaite to write up the notes from the HL7 International context and how things may be changing to ease the contribution by Australian members.

These are the proposed locations where we intentionally looking to use the extension/valueset

  • Practitioner.telecom
  • Practitioner.address
  • PractitionerRole.telecom
  • HealthcareService.telecom
  • Location.telecom
  • Location.address

Background on the telecom extension (from previous meeting)

It is proposed to introduce an extension on AU Base HealthcareService to allow the recording of different phone numbers (and potentially other telecom systems) for different purposes such as after hours.

The NHSD FHIR IG has such an extension. It is proposed to extend AU Base in a substantially similar manner.

Consideration should be given as to whether it is semantically correct to include the including the ContactEntityType codesystem in the value set for the telecom purpose:

https://build.fhir.nhsd.healthdirect.org.au/ValueSet-valueset-au-contact-purpose.html

The Contact Entity Type code system is focused on contact entities rather than telecom purposes.

Given the potential for the addition of a Healthcare Service “contact” element in R5, use of the same code system could lead to two different ways to represent the same thing.

Follow up:

  • AGENCY: Review all valueset references to NCTS make FHIR IG valuesets - priortise this to SRA scope 
  • JD: direct service correspondence to a nominated specific individual; HealthcareService extension
  • JD: backup delivery person as PractitonerRole extension - HL7 V2 STF
  • Rob Eastwood: Continue to "cleanup" the identifier datatypes now that the approach is good
  • BE: put PD POC changes in a github issues and work on the changes in CI build of PD spec; review next time
  • BP: Chase up if existing work on AHPRA registration extensions already exists


Comments:

HL7 International has stated discussing this here:
https://jira.hl7.org/browse/FHIR-25375
Posted by brian_pos at 27 Aug, 2020 05:28