Orders & Observations

January Working Group Meeting

January 16-20, 2012

Meeting Minutes

Table of Contents

ATTENDEES..............................................................................................................................................................4

MONDAY....................................................................................................................................................................6Q1 – OO.................................................................................................................................................................6

OO CMET Cleanup.............................................................................................................................................6Re-Affirmation of Implantable Devices................................................................................................................6Project Management...........................................................................................................................................6Mission/Vision Review........................................................................................................................................7DMP....................................................................................................................................................................7

Q2 – OO.................................................................................................................................................................7Nutrition...............................................................................................................................................................7Review mission and charter................................................................................................................................7Decision making practices..................................................................................................................................7V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation...................................................................................................................................8

Q3 – OO.................................................................................................................................................................8V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation...................................................................................................................................8

Q4 – OO/Pt Care....................................................................................................................................................8DCM - CIMI Model update..................................................................................................................................8Composite Order Update....................................................................................................................................8Care Statement - Clinical Statement - Composite Order....................................................................................9Care Records RMIM (did DMIM update before).................................................................................................9

TUESDAY.................................................................................................................................................................10Q1 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................10

OO CMET.........................................................................................................................................................10Composite Order Model....................................................................................................................................10

Q2 – OO/RX/Pt Safety/PHER/RCRIM..................................................................................................................10Clinical Trail & OO/Lab......................................................................................................................................11Common Product Model - Project Statement...................................................................................................11Common Product Model – Wiki Topics.............................................................................................................11Harmonization/Proposal Calls...........................................................................................................................12

Q3 – OO/CG.........................................................................................................................................................12January 2012 Ballot results...............................................................................................................................12New Projects:....................................................................................................................................................12Specimen Model...............................................................................................................................................12Composite Order Model....................................................................................................................................12Genetic Test Report Binding.............................................................................................................................12

Q4 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................12LRI Implementation IG......................................................................................................................................12

WEDNESDAY..........................................................................................................................................................14Q1 – OO/II/AP.......................................................................................................................................................14

Unique Specimen ID.........................................................................................................................................14II Topics.............................................................................................................................................................14

Q2 – CDS/OO.......................................................................................................................................................14Q3/Q4 – OO..........................................................................................................................................................14

Composite Order Model and Behavioral Model................................................................................................15

THURSDAY..............................................................................................................................................................16Q1 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................16

Composite Order Model / Lab Order Model......................................................................................................16Q2 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................16

V2-V3 Vocabulary.............................................................................................................................................16V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation.................................................................................................................................16

Composite Order Model....................................................................................................................................16Q3 – CS/OO.........................................................................................................................................................16Q4 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................16

LRI Implementation IG......................................................................................................................................16

FRIDAY.....................................................................................................................................................................17Q1 – OO...............................................................................................................................................................17

IHE LCC Project................................................................................................................................................17

AttendeesPlease contact Hans Buitendijk (OO co-chair) in case your name or e-mail is misspelled, or the attendance is not checked appropriately.

Name Company/E-Mail Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Ogvind Aassue ogvind.aasue@rikshospitalet.no √Swapna Abhyankar Swapna.abhyankar@nih.gov √Scott Bolte scott.bolte@ge.com √Andy Bond Andy.bond@nehta.gov.au √Victor Brodsky Vib9020@med.cornell.com √Hans Buitendijk Hans.buitendijk@siemens.com √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √David Burgess √Stephen Chu Stephen.chu@nehta.gov.au √ √ √Lorraine Constable lorraine@constable.ca √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √Norman Daoust Normand@daoustassociates.com √Margaret Dittloff mkd@cbord.com √ √ √ √Jean Duteau Jean.duteau@gpinformatics.com √ √Derrick Evans Derrick.evans@allscripts.com √Kavitha Ganta Kavitha.ganta@houstontx.gov √Adel Ghlamallah aghlamallah@infoway.ca √John Gilbertson jrgilbertson@partners.org √Maggie Gilligan mmgilligan@gmail.com √Hugh Glover Hugh_glover@bluewaveinformatics.co.uk √Peter Goldschmidt pgg@has.com √William Goossen Wgoossen@results4care.nl √W Gregory gregow@pfizer.com √Ernest Grove √Rick Haddorff haddorff.richard@mayo.edu √ √ √ √Freida Hall Freida.x.hall@questdiagnostics.com √ √ √ √ √ √ √Nick Halsey Nick.halsey@ema.europa.eu √James Harrison James.harrison@virginia.edu √ √ √Jorauken Harrison Jnh01@health-state.ny.us √ √John Hatem john.hatem@oracle.com √Rob Hausam rrhausam@gmail.com √ √ √ √Lori Havener lhavener@naaccr.org √Kai Heitman Hl7@kheitmann.de √Edward Helton Edward.helton@nih.gov √Joyce Hernandez joyce.hernandez@merck.com √Julie James julie.james@bluewaveinformatics.co.uk √Gaby Jewell gjewell@cerner.com √Tom de Jong Hl7@tdejong.demon.nl √Jeffery Karp jkarp@cap.org √Les Keepper √Mary Kennedy mkenned@cap.org √John Kiser John.kiser@abbott.com √Juli Klemm klemmj@mail.nih.gov √Helmut Koenig helmut.koenig@siemens.com √John David Larkin Nolen Johndavid.nolen@cerner.com

√

Hugh Leslie Hugh.leslie@oceaninformatics.com √Cor Loef Cor.loef@philips.com √Jeffrey Lewis Jeff.lewis@interfaceware.com √Meredith Lewis melewis@deloitte.com √ √Patrick Loyd Patrick.loyd@gpinformatics.com √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √Michael Martin Michael.martin.dvm.mph@gmail.com √ √ √Ken McCaslin Kenneth.h.mccaslin@questdiagnostics.com √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √Natalie Menser nmenser@deloitte.com √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √Riki Merrick √Brian Pech Bpech1@gmail.com √ √ √Vada Perkins vada.perkins@fda.hhs.gov √Glen Peterson Glen.peterson@fda.hhs.gov √Bertil Reppen bertil@adertura.no √John Roberts John.a.roberts@tn.gov √

Name Company/E-Mail Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Scott Robertson scott.robertson@kp.org √ √ √ √ √ √Junko Sato Sato-junko@pmda.go.jp √Gunther Schadow gschadow@regenstrief.org √ √Lisa Schick lschick@scenpro.com √Shohko Sekine Sekine-shohko@pmda.go.jp √Amnon Shabo shabo@il.ibm.com √Mukesh Sharma sharmam@wush.edu √Ray Simkus Ray.simkus@gmail.com √ √Rik Smithies rik@pnprogram.co.uk √Robert Snelick Robert.snelick@nist.gov √John Snyder jwsnyder@nutrioffice.biz √Harry Solomon Harry.Solomon@med.ge.com √Janice Stevensen janicestevensenus@gmail.com √Tessa van Stijn stijn@nictiz.nl √Michael Tan tan@nictiz.nl √ √Daryl Thomas √Ed Tripp edward.tripp@etripp.com √Mollie Ullman-Cullere Mollie_ullman-cullere@dfci.harvard.edu

√

Stephen Vastagh svastagh@medicalimaging.org √Daniel Vreeman dvreeman@regenstrief.org √Steve Ward stw@lilly.com √Mark Whitsitt mwhitsi@cap.org √Grant Wood grant.wood@imail.org √Bob Yencha √

Communication with declared O&O participants can be done through ord@lists.hl7.org. You can sign up through the HL7 website, www.hl7.org. List servers for focused aspects of the O&O domain are: bloodbank@lists.hl7.org, pharmacy@lists.hl7.org, microbiology@lists.hl7.org, lapauto@lists.hl7.org, nutrition@lists.hl7.org , behavioralmodel@lists.hl7.org, specimen@lists.hl7.org, commonproductmodel@lists.hl7.org, and dicom@lists.hl7.org.

Monday

Q1 – OOAgenda:

OO CMETs Questions Implantable Devices Re-Affirmation Project Review Mission/Vision

OO CMET CleanupDave Hamill raised number of questions regarding several OO CMETs that seemed lost or incorrectly named. We reviewed the following list:

COCT_MT620000 o Original CMET name was: R_ProductListedo Updated OO CMET name is:  R_ListedProductInformationo Is this correct?  (see CMET COCT_MT620005 below)o We need to check with Patrick and Austin later this week.

COCT_MT620005 o CMET name is R_ProductListed (same as Original CMET name of COCT_MT620000)o But my question is ‘Last Balloted’ was ‘never’.   Does CMET R_ProductListed even exist?o We need to check with Patrick later this week as we did find it in the September 2011 ballot package in the

CMET chapter as POCP_MT010100UV. COCT_MT620006

o Original CMET name was: R_ProductReportableo Updated OO CMET name is:  ??o Don't know what CMET this is. Its not being balloted by OO. It was named R_ProductReportable, but that’s

actually COCT_MT630000 (see below)o Also, the ‘Last Balloted’ field is ‘never’.   What does this imply?o We need to check with Patrick later this week.

COCT_MT630000 o Original CMET name was: A_RelevantInformationForProductReportingo Updated OO CMET name is:  R_ProductReportableo Updated OO CMET name is the same as COCT_MT620006 (above).  Is this true?o According to Mead Walker A_RelevantInformationForProductReporting is a locally defined CMET in PORR.o We need to check with Patrick later this week.

Re-Affirmation of Implantable DevicesShould we re-affirm if nobody is actively interested? Should we put that on the HL7 website as a general request?

Check with Todd Cooper et al. during the breaks. - Hans Pursue chasing the authors or one of the device manufacturers. - Hans Check announcement approach. - Ken

If nobody interested, no re-affirmation. Will decide with that information.

Project ManagementWe reviewed all projects in Project Insight and made the following updates:

110 – Order Pattern – Updated timelines/milestones 113 – Lab Result R1 – Put on Hold until Composite Order is complete 213 – Lab IG – Archived as Project #827 replaced it. 312 – Blood, Tissue, Organ – Check with Patrick whether it made it properly into Normative Edition. 349 – Lab CMETs – Put On Hold pending Composite Order Model 521- Blood Bank IG – Double check it was published per Patrick/Lynn discussions. 618 – OO Maintenance – Updated milestones to reflect reality of progress. 625 – Product Model CMETs – What is Status 626 – Substance Model – What is Status

Mission/Vision ReviewWe reviewed and determined no updates are needed. We will affirm in Q2.

DMPWe cleaned up the revision marks and ensured the dates were accurate for the three versions. We will affirm in Q2.

Q2 – OOAgenda:– Nutrition– Mission and Charter– Decision Making Process– V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation

NutritionMargaret Dittloff reviewed the current state of Nutrition order project

Summary:Updates to storyboards and use cases near completeStill need to update model – check with Jean’s scheduleTo do: update for May 2012

Added new storyboards to provide more complete of nutrition content

Question : Elaine asked about coordinating with Patient Care on Allergies and intolerances,

o Margaret mentioned they had contacted Patient Care, and the allergy topic would be discussed on Wednesday.

In the current nutrition model, Severity and criticality items from Allergies and intolerances need elaborating. Question from Lorraine: are you tracking the severity of the reaction, or the severity of the condition?

o Margaret took an action item to discuss that question in an upcoming SME meeting. Question from Ken: about vocabulary for food items for allergies and intolerance and food preferences.

o Margaret responded that they were working with IHTSDO to expand SNOMED-CT coverage in that area.

The intersection of Nutrition orders with clinical orders is more detailed in the current version of the use cases.

Action items: Margaret will post updated use cases to wiki for review Lorraine to check with Jean whether he is comfortable with completing modeling changes for a May ballot (initial

content deadline March 4)

Review mission and charterSummarized our review of mission and charter from q1 (no quorum) Ken McCaslin motion to renew the mission and charter as currently written, Margaret Dittloff second. Vote: Abstain 1 Against: 0 In favour: 3 (send to Lynn that we have reviewed and approved)

Review Relationships with other groups section- Margaret noted we should add EHR, as we are working with them on a current project.- Motion: to add EHR to the list of HL7 work groups we have relationships with- Moved by Margaret Dittloff, seconded by Freida Hall- Vote: Abstain: 1 Against: 0 In favour: 3

Decision making practicesKen McCaslin moves that we reaffirm as is, with track changes off, and update the version number to version 3. Seconded by Margaret Dittloff

Vote: Abstains: 1 Against: 0 In favour: 3

V2.8 Ballot ReconciliationWe had a discussion around proposal 650– This was approved at the May 2010 meeting, but was missed in the minutes. – Last meeting we discussed amending the May minutes to reflect the discussion that happened, but could not find the

motion to make the change was recorded in the minutes.– Motion: Frieda Hall moved that we amend the May 2010 meeting minutes to reflect that proposal 650 was to change

required field (OM1-8) to optional, which ANSI doesn't consider backward compatible.  eDOS Implementation Guide (balloted through HL7) indicates the field was deprecated in favor of OM1-51 - but OM1-51 not added in V2.8. Seconded by Margaret Dittloff.

o Abstain: 1, Against 0, In favour 3

Continued with review of specific topics that can be found in the ballot reconciliation spreadsheet attached.

Q3 – OOAgenda:– V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation

V2.8 Ballot ReconciliationSee Monday Q2 for V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation spreadsheet

Q4 – OO/Pt CareAgenda:

DCM – CIMI Model Update Composite Order Update Care Statement – Clinical Statement – Composite Order Care Records RMIM

DCM - CIMI Model update CIMI – Still organizing, committing to ADL 1.5 for the repository. Will be doing some throw away models to

determine what needs to be done. ADL is a constraining language: Archetype Definition Language (ADL).

Interim Committee to develop the intent. Clinical modeling committee. Group working on the reference model.

Do not want to reinvent the work others have done and try to incrementally take advantage of other peoples work.

CIMI – Effort to do clinical information Modeling Initiative – Bring together those who have been doing clinical modeling. The scope of models to define clinical modeling is so large that it is difficult to create a formal outline.

Next meeting is Vancouver and other than that it should be virtual

Composite Order Update Having to back track on some of the work. Need to go all the way back to requirements gathering and put all

other work on hold. Lab is working faster. Not clear about the SAIF parts will be. Do not have a template ballot that will help define how templates should be defined. Is there anything beyond lab that will support Composite order: Believe there is and there are templates from other groups like pharma and dietary and others. Starting with lab to begin the process.

Care Statement - Clinical Statement - Composite Order Needed to some harmonization between Composite and Clinical statement. Due to bandwidth issues the

individuals have not been able to get together to work on the efforts. Looking for Clinical Statement co-chair to replace Patrick Loyd who has limited bandwidth.

Have removed the care statement in favor of the clinical statement.

Care Records RMIM (did DMIM update before) See the RMIM from William Goosen. It was taken from the Care Statement. Will work on two different kinds of RMIMs one for systematic process and the other to deal with all other

issues. Suggestion on the templates: Should not write down the templates in details but just point to the DMIM.

Tuesday

Q1 – OOAgenda:

OO CMETs 3-Year Plan Composite Order Model

OO CMETWe reviewed the open questions from Monday Q1.

COCT_MT620000 o Original CMET name was: R_ProductListedo Updated OO CMET name is:  R_ListedProductInformationo Is this correct?  (see CMET COCT_MT620005 below)o Answer: Strike wherever listed. This was superceded by R_PRoductListedUniversal POCP_MT010100UV

COCT_MT620005 o CMET name is R_ProductListed (same as Original CMET name of COCT_MT620000)o But my question is ‘Last Balloted’ was ‘never’.   Does CMET R_ProductListed even exist?o Answer: Drop it.

COCT_MT620006 o Original CMET name was: R_ProductReportableo Updated OO CMET name is:  ??o Don't know what CMET this is. Its not being balloted by OO. It was named R_ProductReportable, but that’s

actually COCT_MT630000 (see below)o Also, the ‘Last Balloted’ field is ‘never’.   What does this imply?o Answer: Strike wherever listed. Superceded by R_PRoductReportableUniversal POCP_MT020200UV

COCT_MT630000 o Original CMET name was: A_RelevantInformationForProductReportingo Updated OO CMET name is:  R_ProductReportableo Updated OO CMET name is the same as COCT_MT620006 (above).  Is this true?o According to Mead Walker A_RelevantInformationForProductReporting is a locally defined CMET in PORR.o Answer: Drop it.

Composite Order ModelWe reviewed the progress to date on the Composite Order Model and Laboratory Orders based in particular on the following pages: http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=OO_Behavioral_Model_Conceptual_Specification

Project Pages:

http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Composite_Order

http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Lab_Order_Template

Gforge model and document location

http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/orders/scmsvn/?action=browse&path=%2Ftrunk%2FPOOR%2Fbf%2F

Q2 – OO/RX/Pt Safety/PHER/RCRIM

Agenda: Clinical Trial & OO/Lab Common Product Model - Project Statement Common Product Model - Wiki Topics

o Harmonization Processo Proposals

Project Updates

o 625 – Product Model CMETs – What is Statuso 626 – Substance Model – What is Status

Clinical Trail & OO/Lab RCRIM trying to restart clinical trial message using Lab. Limited participation (just one). So the project is not being moved forward until volunteers are available.

Common Product Model - Project Statement There are not major changes from the draft send out. We need to clarify success criteria. Should it be Normative or stay at DSTU? Normative. We want to attempt to complete in one cycle.

o About 6-8 weeks worth of time to complete the effort.o Gunther’s vocabulary work should be done end of this month for harmonizations by mid Frebruary.

Project Statement with updates applied: Motion to accept with modifications. Ed Tripp, Tim Buxton

o Discussion: Relationship with Substance? This will encompass all elements of the Substances Model.

o Against: 0o Abstain: 4o In favor: 29

Common Product Model – Wiki Topics Location: http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Common_Product_Model Need SPL ballot with CPM ballot as schema changes.

o Not to be done ICSR. Will be raised with Patient Safety when to do. Not necessary to happen at the same time.

Two pages addedo Archived - http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Archived_CPM_Technical_Corrections – Discussed and

whatever is agreed on will be added to the new Normative modelo Current - http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=Current_Technical_Corrections – Still to be discussed and

resolved as part of Should we take out lotNumberText from ProductInstance?

o Since id with II can handle this, why have it? Correct.o Motion to take it out of the Product Model. Julie James, Tom de Jong

Remove from DeviceInstance, Container as well. Would II not be sufficient? II requires root OID and extension, i.e., need an identifier to the system

that identified it. Have a problem that one may know the simple identifier, but not the root, leading to creation of a new OID (which is non-sensical) or a search.

Another example transcription from paper. May need update to II as well to accommodate partial information. To solve use cases must have serious IDs, so should not relax II. Currently no access to full OID, but GS1. Do we need harmonization language in RIM to indicate it is deprecated and clarifying language how

to deal with the practical issues. Against: 1; Abstain: 18; In Favor: 17

o Deprecation in RIM Impractical to expect that OID root will always be available. II needs to be flexible and need proper guidance. Once we have the guidance remove. Guidance needs to come out in the next 6-8 weeks. Motion to submit a harmonization proposal to deprecate lotNumberText from the RIM. The

harmonization must include guidance, agreed to by OO/Rx/Pt Safety/RCRIM/PHER, on how to populate II appropriately. Patrick Loyd, Tom de Jong.

With understanding that guidance will be part of the harmonization proposal. Strongly advised method is that II is globally unique (root + extension) through composites.

Are we sure that II does not require all elements. We will be sure as part of harmonization process.

Against: 0; Abstain: 10; In Favor: 23

Harmonization/Proposal Calls Doodle for Thursday ET (7-12) Tue Q1 – Rx rep, Pt Safety rep, PHER – rep, RCRIM – rep Tue Q2 – Rx rep, Pt Safety rep, PHER – rep, RCRIM - rep

Q3 – OO/CGAgenda:

January 2012 Ballot Results New Projects CG DAM and OO Specimen Model Composite Order Model Genetic Test Report Binding

CG changed to Domain Steering Division

January 2012 Ballot resultsTwo V2.5.1 IGs in ballot (Sequence Variation and Cyto Genetics)

Sequence Variation should be able to get out ballot quickly, minor changes. Included feedback from implementers. CytoGenetics had a minor and major negative. Both addressed and ready to go.

New Projects: Clinical Sequencing – Approved in Domain Steering Division. Potentially V2 IG, V3 CMETs, DAM updates. Family History Pedigree R2 – Addressing ISO fast track process and various functional capabilities, e.g., hearing

loss, other. It will be backwards compatible, mostly changing examples and how to message. Update representation of mutations.

Specimen ModelThe CG team made progress on the Specimen DAM in support of their use cases. We need to compare that Specimen DAM with existing Specimen CMET to determine what updates are needed in either area so we end up with a set of Specimen CMETs that supports the agreed to Specimen DAM. This will require progress on the Specimen CMET R2 project (682).

In two weeks OO conference call to review Specimen DAM and Specimen CMET. We will set up Specimen@lists.hl7.org, and find We need to clean-up the Project Statement for Specimen 682 to reflect current milestones as part of the OO calls.

Composite Order ModelNot discussed

Genetic Test Report BindingNot discussed

Q4 – OOAgenda:

Continue Ballot Reconciliation for LRI Implementation IG.

LRI Implementation IGFor ballot reconciliation, see spreadsheet attached with those disposition comments marked as 17-Jan-2012.

Wednesday

Q1 – OO/II/APAgenda:

Unique Specimen ID II Topics

Unique Specimen ID

Project presented by the AP team with the intent to develop a universal specimen identification process. Promoting that the identifier should be presented in either 2D bar code and/or RFID (Radio Frequency IDentification). There is an issue around re-labeling, where the typical process is to re-label when the specimen travels across organizational boundaries so that the receiving lab has a specimen identifier that their system understands and recognizes. This project is to develop a process to have a Universal Specimen Identification. The other issue is derived specimen.

Proposing that this should be a normative ballot. Since this is a DAM, this is considered an Informative document, and therefore it is recommended that this be adjusted to an Informative document. The content that will be Normative which will be derived from the DAM, it is recommended that it be introduced by a second Project Scope statement and have that PS identify the DSTU track and the timeline to become Normative since the TSC will likely challenge a WG that attempts to go directly to Normative without a DSTU. A second PS will be presented and we believe it will be quickly approved though all groups.

AP would like OO to co-sponsor the project. Motion by Patrick Loyd that OO be co-sponsor of the Informative PS for Unique Specimen ID- Requirements. Seconded by Freida Hall

o Vote: For: 15; Against: 0; Abstain: 0. AP will bring forward a second project for the DSTU/Normative project for OO to co-sponsor.

II Topics Biopsy documentation

o Workings on development of a consistent pater for development of identify biopsy messages. Flow cytometry discussion on their domain of care.

o Looking at IHE profiles that use HL7 v2 orders or lab automation pieces. Trying to make sure that the profiles match their use case. Likely to have more information coming forward in the near future.

IHE info structure committee this morning had a conversation about critical results.

Found an issue in version 2.8 for OBX-8, missing table 0078 reference in the OBX segment table and in paragraph 7.4.2.8 We propose that the table reference be made in both the paragraph and the OBX segment table. Motion by Harry Solomon, seconded by Patrick Loyd. It should be noted that this was last available in HL7 v2.6.

Favor: 14 Against: 0 Abstaining: 1

Do we need to have a joint meeting again? Yes Please have OO host II/AP Agenda item

o Review of project: Unique Specimen ID - Requirements

Q2 – CDS/OOSee notes by CDS work group.VMR being recommended where we already have guidance, e.g., MicroBiology. Need them to present further in OO conference calls on Micro.Order Sets moving to ballot.

Q3/Q4 – OO Agenda:

Composite Order Model and Behavioral Model

Composite Order Model and Behavioral ModelWe continued the review of the models. Suggested updates agreed to include:

Review package structure and how to relate composite order model to lab models Consider whether need a different package view for publishing purposes from working structure Create Template versions of the spec documentation structure Clean up state machines

o Fulfillment or In progress Create a communication diagram as an alternative to the sequence Review of event flow

o Clarify activity currently called "Patient Presents at Lab" to indicate that they are not actually presenting at the lab, maybe Patient Service Center, or just Patient Presents

o Expand lab activities to include steps like evaluating sample for suitability and notifying if rejected o Expand diagram and the storyboard for the simple acute case where the collector goes to the patient. Add

content to the storyboard for the provider collects.

Thursday

Q1 – OO

Composite Order Model / Lab Order ModelWe continued the review of the models.

Q2 – OO

V2-V3 VocabularyWork in progress to harmonize V2 and V3 value sets. Goal is to complete this by V2.9. Objective to determine that OO will use the resulting vocabulary.

Want to get into one table set.

What is process to arrive at agreement wat is V2 only in the grey zone?o Current process is to get V2 as-is into the repository first. Not yet looking at overlap yet.o Next phase on how to converge/merge has not been defined yet.

Where will this be stored? One repository where V2-only, V2-V3-combined, and V3-only is kept together? Or other?

o Likely one store, but different publishing paths. Will it change the message?

o No change to the message, but some attribution and references to the vocabulary would have to change. Still one has to provide code/code system, so no changes in syntax.

Motion to endorse the Vocab project to take V2 terminology into V3 vocabulary model. Rob Hausam, Patrick Loyd.

Discussion: o Note that this is not harmonizing overlaps, only co-locating V2 into V3 vocabulary model without

content change. Against: 0; Abstain: 0; In Favor: 5

V2.8 Ballot ReconciliationSee Monday Q2 for V2.8 Ballot Reconciliation spreadsheet.

Composite Order ModelWe continued the review of the models.

Q3 – CS/OOSee meeting minutes on: http://wiki.hl7.org/index.php?title=CS_January_2012_WGM_Minutes

Q4 – OOAgenda:

Continue Ballot Reconciliation for LRI Implementation IG.

LRI Implementation IGFor ballot reconciliation, see spreadsheet attached to Tuesday Q4 with those disposition comments marked as 19-Jan-2012.

Friday

Q1 – OOAgenda:

IHE LCC Project

IHE LCC ProjectJim Harrison reviewed the purpose and objectives of the IHE LCC project with the slides attached.

As topics come up that require clarifications to the base standard, Jim will work with OO to review, as well as will review the proposed IG with OO once it gets closer to a complete draft.