Change Proposal APSR, August 2013

[Haroske, Gunter]

Dear Christel,

 

On behalf of Thomas and Frank I´d like to send you attached our much more detailed Change Proposal as promised at the F2F meeting in Paris this summer, taking into account all the changes from the IHE_PAT_Suppl_APSR_Rev2 0_TI_2013_08_06 and your remarks to our first short version from August 9th.

 

It was more complicated than expected, and it is still under internal discussion in some aspects, and it will require some more formal improvement for fulfilling the requirements of IHE and HL7.

 

But we hope to stuff the ongoing discussions with new ideas as to come out with a successful APSR solution. We are continuing to work on terminology questions, too, but this will require a lot of questions to be solved, also under the optimistic aspects of rapidly changing scenarios with SNOMED CT use and IHTSDO.

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

Gunter

 

________________________________________

 

Krankenhaus Dresden-Friedrichstadt

Städtisches Klinikum

Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus der TU Dresden

 

Prof. Dr. Gunter Haroske

Institut für Pathologie

 

Friedrichstraße 41, 01067 Dresden

 

Tel.: +49 351 480-3770

Fax: +49 351 480-3799

 

E-Mail:haros...@khdf.de

www.khdf.de

 

http://www.khdf.de/cms/index.php?id=183&site=www&lang=de&path=1%2C306

 

 

[Gunter Haroske]

... und schwupps, sind die organspezifischen Module wieder da  :-) !
Aber unser CP ist aktuelleren Datums.

[Haroske, Gunter]

Dear Francois,

I'm very sorry to have missed the yesterday phone conference. As I wrote to Mary a fortnight ago, I had to attend a tumorboard at 15:30, assuming to have 30 minutes for the conference, but I was confused with the time zones!

I had a first glance at your new version, it is a very good basis to proceed. It will take me some time to get all the points!

I fully agree with your intention to keep organ-specific templates in the profile. Thomas and me are trying to keep them in mind for our ontologic approach. Hope we find a solution which combines simplicity with specificity, also opening the field for all of those problems not yet having started in writing templates and modules.

My first question: Could you give me a simple example for what you are expecting in the table on generic AP Observations (OIDs, names, Value Sets, etc.).

Cordially Yours

Gunter

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 13.11.2013 um 11:16 schrieb "Francoi...@sante.gouv.fr<mailto:Francoi...@sante.gouv.fr>" <Francoi...@sante.gouv.fr<mailto:Francoi...@sante.gouv.fr>>:

Dear Gunter, Thomas and Frank,

We missed you at IHE AP conference call yesterday afternoon.
Christel and I will work on reconciling our current release of APSR with your CP within 3 weeks, and will come back to you as soon as we can.
One point is that APSR has been taken for now 2 years in the national interoperability framework of France, and for backward compatibility reason we need to keep the organ-specific templates in the profile. However we agree with your idea of enabling a LIS to produce its AP reports using only the generic template if it wants to.

Best regards
François

De : Haroske, Gunter [mailto:Haros...@khdf.de]
Envoyé : lundi 11 novembre 2013 09:40
À : 'Christel Daniel'
Cc : r.d...@duke.edu<mailto:a...@duke.edu>; MACARY, François; mke...@cap.org<mailto:mke...@cap.org>; ihe-d-patho...@googlegroups.com<mailto:ihe-d-patho...@googlegroups.com>
Objet : Change Proposal APSR, August 2013

E-Mail:haros...@khdf.de<mailto:g...@khdf.de>
www.khdf.de

http://www.khdf.de/cms/index.php?id=183&site=www&lang=de&path=1%2C306