Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Patient Care WG Care Plan DAM July 3, 2013 1.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Patient Care WG Care Plan DAM July 3, 2013 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Patient Care WG Care Plan DAM July 3,

2 Meeting Etiquette Remember: If you are not speaking, please keep your phone on mute Do not put your phone on hold. If you need to take a call, hang up and dial in again when finished with your other call o Hold = Elevator Music = frustrated speakers and participants This meeting is being recorded o Another reason to keep your phone on mute when not speaking Use the Chat feature for questions, comments and items you would like the moderator or other participants to know. o Send comments to All Participants so they can be addressed publically in the chat, or discussed in the meeting (as appropriate). From S&I Framework to Participants: Hi everyone: remember to keep your phone on mute All Participants

3 3 For this initiative: Interoperable and shared patient assessments across multiple disciplines Shared patient and team goals and desired outcomes Care plans which align, support and inform care delivery regardless of setting or service provider For this Tiger Team: Alignment of HL7 artifacts with LCC artifacts to support care plan exchange HL7 CCS provides Service Oriented Architecture Care Plan DAM provides informational structure LCC Implementation Guides provide functional requirements Goals

4 Agenda Introductions Goals Schedule Discussion of Prioritizations –Ongoing comments can be submitted and viewed on wiki: Next Steps 4

5 Schedule – June/July 2013 SUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAY AM ET: Discussion Prioritization AM ET Meeting Canceled Tentative Presentation to HL7 (TBD) AM ET HL7 Preference and Priority as shown in DAM AM ET Discussion Connections, Crosswalks 30JULY 1JULY 2JULY 3JULY 4JULY 5JULY 6 11 AM ET Discussion Plan Activity Data Element Attributes

6 Work Group Schedules LCC WG SWG MeetingLCC LeadsDate/ TimeProjects LTPAC SWGLarry Garber Terry O'Malley Weekly Mondays, 11-12pm EST C-CDA: Transfer Summary, Consult Note, Referral Note LCC HL7 Tiger Team Russ LeftwichWeekly Wednesdays, pm EST LCC WG comments for HL7 Care Plan DAM LCP SWGBill Russell Sue Mitchell Jennie Harvell Weekly Thursdays 5-6pm EST C-CDA: Care Plan, HomeHealth Plan of Care HL7 WG SWG MeetingHL7 LeadParticipating LCC Members Date/ TimeProjects HL7 Patient Care WGRuss Leftwich Elaine Ayers Stephen Chu Michael Tan Kevin Coonan Susan Campbell Laura H Langford Lindsey Hoggle Bi-weekly Weds, 5 - 6pm EST Care Plan DAM Care Coordination Services (CSS) HL7 Structured Documents WG Bob Dolin Brett Marquard Sue Mitchell Jennie Harvell Weekly Thursdays, 10-12pm EST CDA (various) HL7 SOA WG CCS ProjectJon Farmer Enrique Meneses (facilitators) Stephen Chu Susan CampbellWeekly Tuesdays 5 - 6pm EST Care Coordination Services (CSS) HL7 Patient Generated Document Leslie Kelly HallWeekly Fridays, 12- 1pm EST Patient-authored Clinical Documents

7 7 Can data elements (each of health concern, goal, and intervention) be associated with zero care team members (other than the patient, who would be associated by default)? In other words, zero to many team members associated with the data element (0…* cardinality) Can examples of this situation be provided? If there should be a team member associated with each of the data elements, the statement would be SHALL. Tiger Team Discussion Points

8 8 Can data Health Concern be associated with zero care team members (other than the patient, who would be associated by default)? Can be zero: if patient is keeping his/her own care plan and not sharing it (in personal health record) they would be sole member of care team, or where patient says its only my business and not yoursI want information there so that a healthcare proxy could be aware of it. Patient has hazardous occupation but no one else has an association with that (but this is a risk thats a health concern, so the primary provider might list this as a concern) Fitness level that allows them to run Boston marathon (wellness concern) but not reasonably a requirement that other team members would have other than overarching goal to run in marathon Health Concern to Team Member Cardinality

9 9 Patient has concern that is not a medical condition that needs treatment (ex: nutritional concepts that have no medical basis) If patient has concerns (such as home cleanliness, compulsive cleansing, etc.) that other members of the care team dont see as health concerns Pattern of utilization and nature of utilization goes on the care plan, not necessarily the condition itself (ex: not the bump, but rather the somatic/compulsivity issues would be addressed) Conclusion: in terms of model, Health Concern can be zero to many Recommended conformance: SHOULD Health Concern to Team Member Cardinality

10 10 Can Goal be associated with zero care team members (other than the patient, who would be associated by default)? Conclusion on this is yes, since overarching goals are patients goals (this would be a much more common occurrence than with health concern) There will often be patient goals that would not be associated with another care team member Care teams goals could be subject to negotiation Definition would have to be within constraints of the funding vehicle (ex: patient goal might be ambulation rather than fine motor dexterity, which is care teams goal, and this would be recorded) Theres a difference between the strategic and the tactical issues Recommended conformance: SHOULD Goal to Team Member Cardinality

11 11 Can Intervention be associated with zero care team members (other than the patient, who would be associated by default)? If its a self care issue it could be zero (self care meaning requiring no reasonable instructions by the care team) Conclusion: this can be zero cardinality Recommended conformance: SHOULD Intervention to Team Member Cardinality

12 12 Would the patient be the only care team member associated with a health concern, goal, or intervention? That is, beyond their default association with all, might there be instances where they would be the only care team member associated with a data element and would have accountability for that element? Intervention to Team Member Cardinality

13 13 Establish attributes for Plan Activity Pull elements from Health Concern and Goal as baseline Include role(s): individual/organization Include level(s) of association Plan Activity Attributes Discussion

14 14 Care Plan DAM – Team Member View

15 15 Care Plan DAM – Health Concern Includes expressed by role but no association role(s)

16 16 Care Plan DAM – Goal Does not include any role(s) for expressed by or association

17 17 Care Plan DAM – Plan Activity (Intervention) Does this need additional attributes? need to define

18 18 Questions/Comments to PCWG Comment:

19 Proposed Next Steps Discussion for next week: Next Touch Point meeting with PCWG is TBD (either July 10 or July 24, or both) Update discussion schedule Finalize LCCs Comments by August 4, 2013 for submittal as part of September Ballot

20 20 Contact Information Were here to help. Please contact us if you have questions, comments, or would like to join other projects. S&I Initiative Coordinator Evelyn Gallego Sub Work Group Lead Russ Leftwich Program Management Lynette Elliott Becky Angeles

21 21 Background Slides

22 22 3.4Observation, Condition, Diagnosis, Concern NOTE: The HL7 Patient Care Technical Committee is developing a formal model for condition tracking. The examples provided here are greatly simplified so as to illustrate certain aspects of SNOMED CT implementation. Observations, Conditions, Diagnoses, and Concerns are often confused, but in fact have distinct definitions and patterns. "Observation" and "Condition": An HL7 observation is something noted and recorded as an isolated event, whereas an HL7 condition is an ongoing event. Symptoms and findings (also know as signs) are observations. The distinction between "seizure" and "epilepsy" or between "allergic reaction" and "allergy" is that the former is an observation, and the latter is a condition. SNOMED CT distinguishes between "Clinical Findings" and "Diseases", where a SNOMED CT disease is a kind of SNOMED CT clinical finding that is necessarily abnormal: [ | Clinical finding ] [ | Disease ] SNOMED IG Definitions Continued on next slide

23 23 The SNOMED CT finding/disease distinction is orthogonal to the HL7 observation/condition distinction, thus a SNOMED CT finding or disease can be an HL7 observation or condition. "Diagnosis": The term "diagnosis" has many clinical and administrative meanings in healthcare A diagnosis is the result of a cognitive process whereby signs, symptoms, test results, and other relevant data are evaluated to determine the condition afflicting a patient. A diagnosis often directs administrative and clinical workflow, where for instance the assertion of an admission diagnosis establishes care paths, order sets, etc. A diagnosis is often something that is billed for in a clinical encounter. In such a scenario, an application typically has a defined context where the billable object gets entered. "Concern": A concern is something that a clinician is particularly interested in and wants to track. It has important patient management use cases (e.g. health records often present the problem list or list of concerns as a way of summarizing a patient's medical history). SNOMED IG Definitions, contd… Continued on next slide

24 24 Differentiation of Observation, Condition, Diagnosis, and Concern in common patterns: "Observation" and "Condition": The distinction between an HL7 Observation and HL7 Condition is made by setting the Act.classCode to "OBS" or "COND", respectively. The distinction between a SNOMED finding and SNOMED disease is based on the location of the concept in the SNOMED CT hierarchy. There is no flag in a clinical statement instance for distinguishing between a SNOMED CT finding vs. disease. "Diagnosis": Result of a cognitive process: Could potentially be Indicated by post-coordinating a SNOMED CT finding method attribute with a procedure such as "cognitive process". Directs administrative and clinical workflow: These use cases typically rely more on the context in which the diagnoses are entered (e.g. where an order set has a field designated for the admission diagnosis). In such a case, the distinction of a (particular kind of) diagnosis is that it occurs within a particular organizer (e.g. a condition within an Admission Diagnosis section is an admission diagnosis from an administrative perspective). Something that is billed for: The fact that something was billed for would be expressed in another HL7 message. There is nothing in the pattern for a diagnosis that says whether or not it was or can be billed for. SNOMED IG Definitions, contd… Continued on next slide

25 25 "Concern": The HL7 Patient Care Technical Committee is developing a formal model for condition tracking. In that model, a problem (which may be an Observation, a Procedure, or some other type of Act) is wrapped in an Act with a new Act.classCode CONCERN. The focus in this guide is on the use of SNOMED CT, whereas the Patient Care condition tracking model is the definitive source for the overall structure of a problem list. It should be noted that the administrative representation of a diagnosis and the representation of a concern break the rules from section Observations vs. Organizers, in that these designations are based on context, whereas the designation of something as an Observation vs. Condition is inherent in the clinical statement itself. SNOMED IG Definitions, contd…

26 26 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT Definitions 3.4Observation, Condition, Diagnosis, Concern NOTE: The HL7 Patient Care Technical Committee is developing a formal model for condition tracking. The examples provided here are greatly simplified so as to illustrate certain aspects of SNOMED CT implementation. Observations, Conditions, Diagnoses, and Concerns are often confused, but in fact have distinct definitions and patterns. "Observation" and "Condition": An HL7 observation is something noted and recorded as an isolated event, whereas an HL7 condition is an ongoing event. Symptoms and findings (also know as signs) are observations. The distinction between "seizure" and "epilepsy" or between "allergic reaction" and "allergy" is that the former is an observation, and the latter is a condition. SNOMED CT distinguishes between "Clinical Findings" and "Diseases", where a SNOMED CT disease is a kind of SNOMED CT clinical finding that is necessarily abnormal: [ | Clinical finding ] [ | Disease ]

27 27 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT Definitions, contd… "Diagnosis": The term "diagnosis" has many clinical and administrative meanings in healthcare A diagnosis is the result of a cognitive process whereby signs, symptoms, test results, and other relevant data are evaluated to determine the condition afflicting a patient. A diagnosis often directs administrative and clinical workflow, where for instance the assertion of an admission diagnosis establishes care paths, order sets, etc. A diagnosis is often something that is billed for in a clinical encounter. In such a scenario, an application typically has a defined context where the billable object gets entered. "Concern": A concern is something that a clinician is particularly interested in and wants to track. It has important patient management use cases (e.g. health records often present the problem list or list of concerns as a way of summarizing a patient's medical history).

28 28 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT Definitions, contd… Differentiation of Observation, Condition, Diagnosis, and Concern in common patterns: "Observation" and "Condition": The distinction between an HL7 Observation and HL7 Condition is made by setting the Act.classCode to "OBS" or "COND", respectively. The distinction between a SNOMED finding and SNOMED disease is based on the location of the concept in the SNOMED CT hierarchy. There is no flag in a clinical statement instance for distinguishing between a SNOMED CT finding vs. disease. "Diagnosis": Result of a cognitive process: Could potentially be Indicated by post- coordinating a SNOMED CT finding method attribute with a procedure such as "cognitive process". Directs administrative and clinical workflow: These use cases typically rely more on the context in which the diagnoses are entered (e.g. where an order set has a field designated for the admission diagnosis). In such a case, the distinction of a (particular kind of) diagnosis is that it occurs within a particular organizer (e.g. a condition within an Admission Diagnosis section is an admission diagnosis from an administrative perspective).

29 29 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT Definitions, contd… Differentiation of Observation, Condition, Diagnosis, and Concern in common patterns: "Observation" and "Condition": The distinction between an HL7 Observation and HL7 Condition is made by setting the Act.classCode to "OBS" or "COND", respectively. The distinction between a SNOMED finding and SNOMED disease is based on the location of the concept in the SNOMED CT hierarchy. There is no flag in a clinical statement instance for distinguishing between a SNOMED CT finding vs. disease. "Diagnosis: Result of a cognitive process: Could potentially be Indicated by post-coordinating a SNOMED CT finding method attribute with a procedure such as "cognitive process". Directs administrative and clinical workflow: These use cases typically rely more on the context in which the diagnoses are entered (e.g. where an order set has a field designated for the admission diagnosis). In such a case, the distinction of a (particular kind of) diagnosis is that it occurs within a particular organizer (e.g. a condition within an Admission Diagnosis section is an admission diagnosis from an administrative perspective). Something that is billed for: The fact that something was billed for would be expressed in another HL7 message. There is nothing in the pattern for a diagnosis that says whether or not it was or can be billed for.

30 30 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT Definitions, contd… "Concern": The HL7 Patient Care Technical Committee is developing a formal model for condition tracking. In that model, a problem (which may be an Observation, a Procedure, or some other type of Act) is wrapped in an Act with a new Act.classCode CONCERN. The focus in this guide is on the use of SNOMED CT, whereas the Patient Care condition tracking model is the definitive source for the overall structure of a problem list. It should be noted that the administrative representation of a diagnosis and the representation of a concern break the rules from section Observations vs. Organizers, in that these designations are based on context, whereas the designation of something as an Observation vs. Condition is inherent in the clinical statement itself.

31 31 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT XML Examples: Clinical Finding Example 16. Assertion of a clinical finding Headache The observation is asserting a clinical finding of "headache".

32 32 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT XML Examples: Diagnosis Example 17. Context-dependent (administrative) assertion of a diagnosis Hospital Admission Diagnosis Hospital admission diagnosis of headache That a given diagnosis is, for instance, an Admission Diagnosis, can be asserted by wrapping the observation within a particular organizer.

33 33 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT XML Examples: Concerns Example 18. Example of a problem list containing concerns Problem List Headache Osteoarthritis of knee

34 34 HL7 v3 SNOMED CT XML Examples: Concerns, contd…. That a given clinical statement is a part of a condition tracking structure can be asserted by containing the clinical statement within the concern act, using the mechanism defined by the HL7 Patient Care Technical Committee, as shown here.


Download ppt "Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Patient Care WG Care Plan DAM July 3, 2013 1."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google