Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Care Coordination Services (CCS) May 29, 2013.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Care Coordination Services (CCS) May 29, 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1 Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Care Coordination Services (CCS) May 29, 2013 1

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 patient story as a baseline for representing and prioritizing Goals, Outcomes and Assessments –Ongoing comments can be submitted and viewed on wiki: http://wiki.siframework.org/LCC+HL7+Tiger+Team+SWG Next Steps 4

5 Schedule – May 2013 SUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAY 1 234 11 AM ET: Overview of HL7 LCC Domain Analysis Model 567891011 11 AM ET Discussion: Risks, Health Concerns, Barriers 12131415161718 11 AM ET Discussion: Risks, Health Concerns, Barriers 5 PM ET Touch Point with PCWG 19202122232425 11 AM ET: Discussion: Goals, Outcomes and Assessments 262728293031 11 AM ET: Discussion cont’d Goals, Outcomes and Assessments

6 Schedule – June 2013 SUNDAYMONDAYTUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYFRIDAYSATURDAY 2345678 11 AM ET: Discussion Prioritization 9101112131415 11 AM ET Discussion TBD 16171819202122 11 AM ET Discussion TBD 23242526272829 11 AM ET: Discussion TBD 30

7 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, 11- 12pm EST LCC WG comments for HL7 Care Plan DAM LCP SWGBill Russell Sue Mitchell Jennie Harvell Weekly Thursdays 11- 12pm EST (through May 30) Weekly Thursdays 5-6pm EST starting June 6 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

8 8 Discuss Goals, Outcomes and Assessments How best to designate and represent these considerations, either implied or manually entered How and to what extent are each of these considerations listed out, where implied or manually entered How to prioritize each consideration Discussion Overview

9 9 Care Plan Glossary Definitions Goals A defined outcome or condition to be achieved in the process of patient care. Includes patient defined goals (e.g., prioritization of health concerns, interventions, longevity, function, comfort) and clinician specific goals to achieve desired and agreed upon outcomes. Suggest changing “condition” to “status” Outcomes Status, at one or more points in time in the future, related to established care plan goals. Needs to be measurable Assessments (Not currently defined in Care Plan Glossary)

10 10 Goals o Types of goals  Computable  Behavioral  Overarching  Absolute preferences o Proponent of a goal (who proposed the goal) o Supports full disclosure, transparency and aligns with MU (CDS) o Agreement/acceptance of goal o Suggest rewriting as “agreement to the goal statement” and clinician documents by what means the agreement has occurred  Care team members  Patient o Prioritization o Links to care team members/accountability Goals

11 11 Outcomes o Intermediate outcomes/status o Desired outcomes Outcomes

12 12 Assessment o Observation/monitoring o Status/progress o Goal review  Goal vs. desired outcome o Goal update  Acceptance Assessment

13 13 Discussion on Prioritizations Map out how to designate prioritizations Determine how to best represent/model prioritizations For Next Week

14 Proposed Next Steps Schedule next Touch Point meeting with PCWG Update discussion schedule Finalize LCC’s Comments by August 4, 2013 for submittal as part of September Ballot

15 15 Contact Information We’re here to help. Please contact us if you have questions, comments, or would like to join other projects. S&I Initiative Coordinator Evelyn Gallego evelyn.gallego@siframework.orgevelyn.gallego@siframework.org Sub Work Group Lead Russ Leftwich cmiotn@gmail.comcmiotn@gmail.com Program Management Lynette Elliott lynette.elliott@esacinc.comlynette.elliott@esacinc.com Becky Angeles becky.angeles@esacinc.combecky.angeles@esacinc.com

16 16 Background Slides

17 17 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: [ 404684003 | Clinical finding ] [ 64572001 | Disease ] SNOMED IG Definitions Continued on next slide

18 18 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, cont’d… Continued on next slide

19 19 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, cont’d… Continued on next slide

20 20 "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 3.1.1 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, cont’d…


Download ppt "Longitudinal Coordination of Care (LCC) Workgroup (WG) HL7 Tiger Team Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Care Coordination Services (CCS) May 29, 2013."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google