CommunicationRequest workflow may need clarification

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Change Request
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Priority: Medium
    • US Da Vinci HRex (FHIR)
    • 0.2.0 [deprecated]
    • Clinical Interoperability Council
    • Exchanges allowing human intervention [deprecated]
    • Hide

      The word 'focus' was meant to be 'intent'.  However, you are correct, that the CommunicationRequest resource doesn't actually have 'intent' in R4 - or in the R5 draft.  We will submit a change request to get this rectified in R5.  We will remove the wording in the HRex spec that refers to CommunicationRequest.intent given that HRex is targeting R4 and we can't give implementers guidance on the use of an element that doesn't exist.  (Note: there's a separate discussion on whether we continue to retain the non-task CommunicationRequest workflow in the decision tree at all.  The lack of CommunicationRequest.intent is one more challenge with the non-Task workflow.)

      Show
      The word 'focus' was meant to be 'intent'.  However, you are correct, that the CommunicationRequest resource doesn't actually have 'intent' in R4 - or in the R5 draft.  We will submit a change request to get this rectified in R5.  We will remove the wording in the HRex spec that refers to CommunicationRequest.intent given that HRex is targeting R4 and we can't give implementers guidance on the use of an element that doesn't exist.  (Note: there's a separate discussion on whether we continue to retain the non-task CommunicationRequest workflow in the decision tree at all.  The lack of CommunicationRequest.intent is one more challenge with the non-Task workflow.)
    • Marti Velezis / Jimmy Tcheng : 6-0-1
    • Correction
    • Non-substantive

      I find several parts of section 3.7.1 to be unclear.

      It states:

      The basics of this mechanism are that a formal CommunicationRequest - generally with a focus of 'order' 

      In this context, I expect "focus" to be an element of CommunicationRequest, but it doesn't appear to be. The closest thing seems to be .subject which is described as the "Focus of message" but that can only be a patient or group, not an order. Please clarify how a CommunicationRequest conveys its "focus"

       

      Later in Step 1 of section 3.7.1.1, it says:

      The CommunicationRequest sent to the data source should be a copy with intent of 'filler-order' that references the original data consumer-maintained original 'placer-order'.

      CommunicationRequest doesn't seem to include an intent element, so it's not clear how "filler-order" should be conveyed. Does this statement relate to the above mentioned "order" that is the focus of the CommunicationRequest? Clarification would be helpful.

       

       

            Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Craig Newman
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: