HL7AU - HL7V2 WG : 2018-02-27 Meeting notes

Created by Donna Moore, last modified by David McKillop on 27 Feb, 2018

Date

Attendees

Apologies

Date - Next Meet

 - Next meeting at 10am AEST / 11am ADST

Discussion items

ItemWhoNotes
Update on the idea about “decoupling” of atomic results (OBXs) from their Universal Service Identifiers (OBRs) for the purpose of display ? (from meeting on 13 Feb)Dalisay Giffard

Andrew McIntyre, Jared Davison - discussed the use of OBX-21 from HL7 V2.6.
Dalisay: discussed the issue with the systems at QH and how the groupings can be re-arranged.

Andrew: Any report with an OBR should be shown to the user as an intact.

Michael: QH has a specific need for policy work and there isn't a current forum. QH would need to go back to a policy.

Michael: require safe rendering with a display segment and also allow use of atomic data.

Andrew: Prefers a consistent display and should be displayed under the report header (OBR) it was sent under. Has an issue with some PDF's which have lots of header that doesn't really contribute to the report.

Michael: Clinical risk with displeay headers being mixed up.

Dalisay: to document her processes required.

Andrew: Lack of reference range is clinically dangerous.

Michael: What has been shown by Dalisay breaks a number of rules ie OBX results being taken out of context.

Dalisay: To ensure display segments with the appropriate OBX's.

Andrew: Could write OBX-21 into the APUTS std. and Mchael agreed.

Michael: Added content to teh APUTS std will have the opportunity to be reviewed.

Feedback on 'Proposal to source Header codes  from SNOMED CT-AU'

Peter Scott

Michael: Would like to pass the paper Peter wrote to the people who handle report headers.

Andrew: For REF message jsut add a few codes under the summary.

Jared: Unsure Peter is comfortable with the paper in its current form.

Michael: Suggested to change the paper to the current form of thinking about referral.

Peter: was thinking the document wasn't necessary any more and has changed the document to reflect that. Peter was uncomfortable about the pathology content and unsure of it being an output from the C'tee.

Michael: Was trying to get people to understand the complexity of the headings. Michael will write his own content.

Email from Stephen Chu: 

Referral Level 2 conformance:
MSH-12 Version ID field content
2.4^AUS&Australia&ISO3166_1^HL7AU-OO-REF-SIMPLIFIED-201706&&L
Referral Level 1 conformance:
MSH-12 Version ID field content
2.4^AUS&Australia&ISO3166_1^HL7AU-OO-REF-SIMPLIFIED-201706-L1&&L

This example has a length of 61 &  64, while the 2.4 specification for MSH-12 has Len 60.
Can I suggest truncating "SIMPLIFIED" to "SIMP"
[Comment]:
The problem with this approach is that "SIMP" is not understood by receiving systems unless it is defined in the conformance profile or the standards.

 Stephen Chu

 Jared: Recieving systems need to know what to do with this and believes implementers have coded agaisnt it. Suggested dropping "Australia" frmo example.

Andrew/ Michael: Suggested relaxing the field length restriction. Change the length and see if people object.

Jared: This detail has been run through at Connectathons and the issue wasn't raised. The issue was probably raised from some one running it through a validator.

Jared/Andrew: Extend the length from 60 to 250 characters. Change made to HL7 MSH table in standard.

Jared: Responded to Stephen Chu & Kyle McDonald via Confluence comment.

Discussion items from last week:

  • Michael to send Brett an email about the HL7 Au Board's decision on Brasskazoo

Brett (via Skype) said the HL7 Au Board had approved getting Will back to do more work, but he can't find it in the minutes at the moment. Brett to follow up.
Jared walked through the changes of the Standard to accommodate the Referral message
Jared: discussed the changes to the standard incorporating the new Referral content.

Action items

  • Michael Legg sent (10.14am 27.2.2018 AEST) Brett an email about the HL7 Au Board's decision on Brasskazoo.  Brett to follow up with details in the minutes of the last HL7 Au meeting.



Attachments:

image2018-2-15_8-40-55.png (image/png)

Comments:

Stephen Chu, kyle macdonald: The committee has discussed and drafted increasing the field length. The existing identifier has been used in a connectathon, and the issue wasn't raised there, so we have no knowledge of any issues to this at this stage. Increasing length of the field will resolve the issue for supporting systems. Is this reasonable? See changes: 2 Patient Administration for Pathology#2PatientAdministrationforPathology-2.1.9.12MSH-12VersionID(VID)00012
Posted by jdavison at 27 Feb, 2018 11:39

Jared Davison - thank you very much for addressing this matter. Increasing the length of this field should address this issue.

Question - will the new length be 255?
Posted by s_chu at 27 Feb, 2018 11:43

I can't actually see the change referenced anywhere in this link or sublinks.

What am I missing?
Posted by kylemacdonald2 at 27 Feb, 2018 12:27

2.1.9 MSH - message header segment

††††Australian variation to HL7 V2.4 with the length changed from 60 to 250 characters.
Posted by jdavison at 27 Feb, 2018 13:52

See table 2.1.9 HL7 Attribute Table - MSH - Message Header
Posted by jdavison at 27 Feb, 2018 13:52