Save encounter workflow - Resolving a patient identity

Hi all,

I’ve created this thread so that the Interoperability Layer community and the Client Registry community can discuss the interaction with the CR as a part of the save encounter workflow.

Here is the link to the workflow: https://wiki.ohie.org/display/documents/Save+encounter+workflow

In this workflow the IL contacts the CR to resolve a patient’s identity and to retrieve the patients unique enterprise identifier so that the IL can use this for further processing. We have spoken about using the IHE PIX profile for performing this function. I wanted to check with both communities if this is the standards that makes the most sense for this particular interaction. My view is that is seems to be.

Cheers,

Ryan

···


Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton
E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Dear Ryan,

Thanks for this pure technical way of showing Encounter Workflow in OHIE. This sequence diagram includes HMIS as Actor, but still I don’t understand why including it though it is not yet needed/involved in saving encounter workflow. Was this a intentional omission…? Thanks a lot.

···

Best Regards,

Mugabo** **KAMONYO, MSCS

Electronic MedicalRecord JavaDeveloper

Ministry of Health

P.O. Box 84 Kigali-Rwanda

email: oynomak@gmail.com

Tel: (+250) 788 77 95 95 / (+250) 728 77 95 95

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:

Hi all,

I’ve created this thread so that the Interoperability Layer community and the Client Registry community can discuss the interaction with the CR as a part of the save encounter workflow.

Here is the link to the workflow: https://wiki.ohie.org/display/documents/Save+encounter+workflow

In this workflow the IL contacts the CR to resolve a patient’s identity and to retrieve the patients unique enterprise identifier so that the IL can use this for further processing. We have spoken about using the IHE PIX profile for performing this function. I wanted to check with both communities if this is the standards that makes the most sense for this particular interaction. My view is that is seems to be.

Cheers,

Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton

E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Ryan

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Interoperability Layer (OpenHIE)” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openhie-interoperability-layer+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Hi Kamonyo,

Thanks for noting this. The idea is to include all actors that participate in OpenHIE so that the diagrams are more consistent, even when not all of the actors are required. You are correct it is not needed in this workflow but it shows that it is still a part of OpenHIE even though it doesn’t participate in this workflow.

Cheers,

Ryan

···

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:49 AM, KAMONYO MUGABO oynomak@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Ryan,

Thanks for this pure technical way of showing Encounter Workflow in OHIE. This sequence diagram includes HMIS as Actor, but still I don’t understand why including it though it is not yet needed/involved in saving encounter workflow. Was this a intentional omission…? Thanks a lot.


Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton
E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Best Regards,

Mugabo** **KAMONYO, MSCS

Electronic MedicalRecord JavaDeveloper

Ministry of Health

P.O. Box 84 Kigali-Rwanda

email: oynomak@gmail.com

Tel: (+250) 788 77 95 95 / (+250) 728 77 95 95

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:

Hi all,

I’ve created this thread so that the Interoperability Layer community and the Client Registry community can discuss the interaction with the CR as a part of the save encounter workflow.

Here is the link to the workflow: https://wiki.ohie.org/display/documents/Save+encounter+workflow

In this workflow the IL contacts the CR to resolve a patient’s identity and to retrieve the patients unique enterprise identifier so that the IL can use this for further processing. We have spoken about using the IHE PIX profile for performing this function. I wanted to check with both communities if this is the standards that makes the most sense for this particular interaction. My view is that is seems to be.

Cheers,

Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton

E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Ryan

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Interoperability Layer (OpenHIE)” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openhie-interoperability-layer+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Hi Client Registry community,

I’d like to start up this conversation again. From looking at the save encounter workflow it seem that the most appropriate transaction to use for this would be the PIX ITI-9 transaction (PIX Query) using a HL7 QBP^Q23 message. Is this correct? And also is this the message that client registry community sees are being the most appropriate message for this situation?

Cheers,

Ryan

···

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:

Hi Kamonyo,

Thanks for noting this. The idea is to include all actors that participate in OpenHIE so that the diagrams are more consistent, even when not all of the actors are required. You are correct it is not needed in this workflow but it shows that it is still a part of OpenHIE even though it doesn’t participate in this workflow.

Cheers,

Ryan


Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton
E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:49 AM, KAMONYO MUGABO oynomak@gmail.com wrote:

Dear Ryan,

Thanks for this pure technical way of showing Encounter Workflow in OHIE. This sequence diagram includes HMIS as Actor, but still I don’t understand why including it though it is not yet needed/involved in saving encounter workflow. Was this a intentional omission…? Thanks a lot.


Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton

E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Best Regards,

Mugabo** **KAMONYO, MSCS

Electronic MedicalRecord JavaDeveloper

Ministry of Health

P.O. Box 84 Kigali-Rwanda

email: oynomak@gmail.com

Tel: (+250) 788 77 95 95 / (+250) 728 77 95 95

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Ryan Crichton ryan@jembi.org wrote:

Hi all,

I’ve created this thread so that the Interoperability Layer community and the Client Registry community can discuss the interaction with the CR as a part of the save encounter workflow.

Here is the link to the workflow: https://wiki.ohie.org/display/documents/Save+encounter+workflow

In this workflow the IL contacts the CR to resolve a patient’s identity and to retrieve the patients unique enterprise identifier so that the IL can use this for further processing. We have spoken about using the IHE PIX profile for performing this function. I wanted to check with both communities if this is the standards that makes the most sense for this particular interaction. My view is that is seems to be.

Cheers,

Ryan Crichton

Software Developer, Jembi Health Systems | SOUTH AFRICA

Mobile: +27845829934 | Skype: ryan.graham.crichton

E-mail: ryan@jembi.org

Ryan

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Interoperability Layer (OpenHIE)” group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openhie-interoperability-layer+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.