Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CH EMED Organization (Quentin Ligier, ahdis) #294

Open
ig-feedback opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 8 comments
Open

CH EMED Organization (Quentin Ligier, ahdis) #294

ig-feedback opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 8 comments
Labels
discussion on hold depending on other processes STU 5 Ballot 2024

Comments

@ig-feedback
Copy link
Collaborator

ch.fhir.ig.ch-emed#5.0.0-ballot /StructureDefinition-ch-emed-organization.html

The organization address is required, most probably because it was required in the IPAG report (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ui3NGFE2I8yiOlHELk-B0Pke2l9-Jbe5BTeYOnS8-uE/edit?gid=0#gid=0)
In the EPR and the HPD, the address is not required.
It's an issue for the PMP Portal, which creates Practitioner/PractitionerRole/Organization resources depending on the HPD content. It is unable to generate a valid document when the organization has no address in the HPD.

Quentin Ligier, ahdis

@qligier
Copy link
Member

qligier commented Aug 29, 2024

@ziegm
Copy link
Collaborator

ziegm commented Aug 29, 2024

yes, the assumption of the origin of this requirement is correct.

@qligier will attend at the meeting on the 4.8.24 to discuss

@ziegm ziegm added this to the v5.0.0 milestone Aug 29, 2024
@dvribeira
Copy link
Contributor

dvribeira commented Aug 29, 2024

Not sure how relevant this might be, but this is also mandatory on the eMediplan CHMED23A specs. Hence misaligning this now might be also a problem for the eMedication service and other systems that might have to support export to eMediplan.

image

@qligier
Copy link
Member

qligier commented Aug 29, 2024

Thanks @dvribeira, that is quite relevant! In CHMED16AF, it is not constrained, I'm not sure if both formats are supposed to be compatible.

https://chmed20af.emediplan.ch/fhir/StructureDefinition-chmed20af-card-composition.html

@dvribeira
Copy link
Contributor

dvribeira commented Aug 29, 2024

For what I have seen CHMED16A (eMediplan proper, not the FHIR translation) neither the practitioner nor the organization were modelled, the model in general being quite simpler than CHMED23A:
imagem

The FHIR translation from CHMED23A is yet to be published, not sure if there is an updated ETA on this. An updated version of the print format should also be published at some point this year I believe, since it has been spun off the main spec document.

@dvribeira
Copy link
Contributor

dvribeira commented Aug 29, 2024

Given that this is a new constraint on the eMediplan specs and that maybe to some degree the new model has been updated to better accommodate translations to/from the FHIR version (pure speculation on my side), maybe on the eMediplan side they would agree on relaxing the constraint as well...

@qligier
Copy link
Member

qligier commented Sep 4, 2024

PJ OE QL SK
IPAG defines the optionality of the organization address.
It is required in the eMediplan.
It is optional in the vaccination format, and more generally in the EPR.

The issue is kept open to gather feedback.

@oliveregger
Copy link
Collaborator

CHMED16A Revision 2 introduces also Organization for ePrescription: https://github.com/ig-emediplan/specification/pull/1/files

@ziegm ziegm added discussion on hold depending on other processes and removed to be discussed @ telco labels Sep 19, 2024
@ziegm ziegm removed this from the v5.0.0 milestone Sep 19, 2024
@ziegm ziegm added the STU 5 Ballot 2024 label Oct 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion on hold depending on other processes STU 5 Ballot 2024
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants