When should we fill in "Issuer of Patient ID macro" ?

[Vincent Daanen]

Hi guys,

just a question: say my meddev produce DICOM images but the Patient ID is 'given' by the RIS or any part of the hospital information system.

Is this a good reason to fill the "Issuer of Patient ID" macro ?

Can I generalize and say that if the Patient ID is not computed by my med dev, then I have to fill this macro ?

thanks for advice

V


--------------= Posted using GrabIt =----------------
------= Binary Usenet downloading made easy =---------
-= Get GrabIt for free from http://www.shemes.com/ =-

[David Clunie]

Hi Vincent

The issuer is not the device but the owner of the name space in
which the patient id is unique (e.g., for an MRN, the hospital
that assigns the MRN); i.e., the "assigning authority".

See the IHE Multiple Image Manager/Archive (MIMA) Profile for
an exhaustive description of the use of this.

So if you get it from the RIS via MWL, propagate it, if you don't,
you could consider making it configurable to populate with site-
specific values at device installation time.

David

[Peter B Schmidt]

Hello Vincent, hello David,

one more remark: If your meddev is a PACS and you reconcile the number,
make sure the "issuer" is also changed accordingly.

If it was set before reconciliation and you got no new value, remove it.

If you have one delivered by RIS received in the Worklist, use it. Some
hospital systems do not use the PatientID as required by the workflow if
the creator is different or absent.

If you design a new RIS, consider using the issuer attribute. Customers
ask for it more and more.

Just a remark from someone who had this topic on his plate recently to
keep you out of trouble ;o)


Kind regards,


Peter