Audit messages for FHIR profiles

10 views
Skip to first unread message

andries

unread,
Nov 21, 2022, 10:33:19 AM11/21/22
to IHE ITI Technical Committee
Hi

The audit messages that are defined in ITI/FHIR profiles use
  • EventTypeCode = EV(ITI-78, urn:ihe:event-type-code, Mobile Patient Demographics Query)
PCC-44 (QEDm) defines 
  • EventTypeCode = EV(“PCC-44”, “IHE Transactions”, “Mobile Query Existing Data”)
for the same.

Is there a specific reason PCC-44 doesn;'t use the "urn:ihe:event-type-code" code? Would  we violate the PCC-44 specifications if the audit message we generate includes 
  • EventTypeCode = EV(PCC-44, urn:ihe:event-type-code, Mobile Query Existing Data)?

Thanks

Andries Hamster

John Moehrke

unread,
Nov 21, 2022, 10:53:31 AM11/21/22
to andries, IHE ITI Technical Committee
The codeSystem system of urn:ihe:event-type-code is the system value when we say "IHE Transactions". Think of the "IHE Transactions" as a display name for the codeSystem with the system value of urn:ihe:even-type-code.

see https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/ITI_Vocabulary_Registry_and_Data_Dictionary


John Moehrke 🔥 Architect: Healthcare Informatics Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security
IHE Co-Chair IT Infrastructure Planning and Technical
HL7 Co-Chair Security WG, FHIR FMG, FHIR facilitator, and 
FHIR Foundation founding member
Employee of By Light -- Contractor to VHA MyHealtheVet
JohnM...@gmail.com  |  M +1 920-564-2067  |  John.M...@bylight.com
 https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "IHE ITI Technical Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ititech+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ititech/7278660c-2f05-44f4-a21d-fa215fcbe99dn%40googlegroups.com.

Gregorio Canal

unread,
Nov 21, 2022, 12:03:49 PM11/21/22
to John Moehrke, andries, IHE ITI Technical Committee
Hi Jhon,

Do you mean that in ATNA messages we can have both values?
So that even if the transactions defines 
  • EventTypeCode = EV(“PCC-44”, “IHE Transactions”, “Mobile Query Existing Data”)
i CAN post an audit to the ARR with eventType  EV(“PCC-44”, “urn:ihe:event-type-code”, “Mobile Query Existing Data”)  ?

Or do you mean that if the transactions defines 
  • EventTypeCode = EV(“PCC-44”, “IHE Transactions”, “Mobile Query Existing Data”)
i SHALL post an audit to the ARR with eventType  EV(“PCC-44”, “urn:ihe:event-type-code”, “Mobile Query Existing Data”)  ? (this seems to me a breaking change)

Or that both values are valid for IHE and I shall use them according to what has been defined in the transaction?

Gregorio




--
Gregorio Canal
Standardization and Testing Area | Arsenàl.IT

John Moehrke

unread,
Nov 21, 2022, 1:08:58 PM11/21/22
to Gregorio Canal, andries, IHE ITI Technical Committee
The intention is that the simplification for documentation of the "EV()" macro, presumed that when the second parameter was "IHE Transaction", that the technical interpretation of that is that the urn was what was actually used. The string "IHE Transactions" is not used at the technical level. This string is just there for Technical Framework documentation, for human reader. Even the "EV()" macro is just for human understanding. There is no technical thing that is "EV()".


John Moehrke 🔥 Architect: Healthcare Informatics Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security
IHE Co-Chair IT Infrastructure Planning and Technical
HL7 Co-Chair Security WG, FHIR FMG, FHIR facilitator, and 
FHIR Foundation founding member
Employee of By Light -- Contractor to VHA MyHealtheVet
JohnM...@gmail.com  |  M +1 920-564-2067  |  John.M...@bylight.com
 https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com


Gregorio Canal

unread,
Nov 22, 2022, 4:50:38 AM11/22/22
to John Moehrke, andries, IHE ITI Technical Committee
I don't think that was the intent...

I'm pretty sure that during Connectathon we verify that in the EvnetTypeCode there is the string "IHE Transactions".
And the same is checked by EVS client Audit validators (below one for ITI-52):
image.png

Here is an example of ITI-18 audit message that has EvnetTypeCode@CodeSystemName "IHE Transactions" https://gazelle.ihe.net/gss/syslog/view.seam?id=7239

If you expect that EventTypeCode@CodeSystemName is valued with urn:ihe:event-type-code in the audit message, this seems to me a breaking change.

Gregorio

John Moehrke

unread,
Nov 22, 2022, 8:02:39 AM11/22/22
to Gregorio Canal, andries, IHE ITI Technical Committee
This was the intention of the specification all along, it was not clear. I was unaware of how connectathon chose to test. Had I known at the time I would have corrected them. Many codes were not properly tested in the past, not just audit logging. 

For FHIR AuditEvent, it clearly needs to be using this codeSystem system value and not a string in the .system element.

Legacy DICOM AuditMessage may simply be not as clear.

John Moehrke 🔥 Architect: Healthcare Informatics Standards - Interoperability, Privacy, and Security
IHE Co-Chair IT Infrastructure Planning and Technical
HL7 Co-Chair Security WG, FHIR FMG, FHIR facilitator, and 
FHIR Foundation founding member
Employee of By Light -- Contractor to VHA MyHealtheVet
JohnM...@gmail.com  |  M +1 920-564-2067  |  John.M...@bylight.com
 https://healthcaresecprivacy.blogspot.com


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages