Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Encounter service event #40

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

Encounter service event #40

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

mikajylha
Copy link
Collaborator

@mikajylha mikajylha commented Jan 27, 2023

First bite at Palvelutapahtuma

Mika Jylhä added 6 commits January 26, 2023 10:22
Provide more context to encounter intro with an example.

Add encounter example fsh:s.
I can't get it to work. Is there an issue in sushi?
I couldn't get this text to fit nicely in the example. Putting it back to
the main intro text.

Added some stub paragraphs for other relvant parts, so that its clear that
patients in a ward is not the only concern we are trying to adress.
@mikajylha
Copy link
Collaborator Author

mikajylha commented Jan 27, 2023

This PR builds on PR #37 which should be merged first. Keeping this as a draft until the other is finished.

First relevant commit: a867edb

@mikajylha mikajylha requested a review from mrinnetmaki January 27, 2023 16:38
Mika Jylhä added 2 commits January 30, 2023 18:13
First bite at settling the relationship between Kanta Palvelutapahtuma and
encounter.
@mikajylha mikajylha force-pushed the encounter_service_event branch from a867edb to ff789ec Compare January 30, 2023 16:16
@fhir-fi fhir-fi changed the base branch from main to master January 30, 2023 16:53
Copy link
Collaborator

@mrinnetmaki mrinnetmaki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK for me to pull this in now, but I'd like to discuss the approach in our next meeting.


* extension contains ServiceEvent named serviceEvent 0..1

Extension: ServiceEvent
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would have thought palvelutapahtumatunniste to be a specific kind of an Identifier.

Usage: #example
* id = "id-for-visit"
* identifier.use = #usual
* identifier.value = "id-for-visit"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The usual identifier should be

the identifier recommended for display and use in real-world interactions.

I don't think id-for-visit is such an identifier.

I do think a palvelutapahtumatunniste might be...

Description: "An example of a FI Base encounter where a patient is currently receiving care at a ward."
Usage: #example
* id = "id-for-ward-encounter"
* identifier.use = #usual
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment as for the ambulatory example.


The scope of palvelutapahtuma is [described](https://www.kanta.fi/jarjestelmakehittajat/liite-2-palvelutapahtumien-esimerkkeja)
in Kanta-documentation (in finnish). It's scope is not the same as encounter's. Encounter and
Palvelutapahtuma will overlap as concepts (depending on implementation).
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We have palvelutapahtuma both capitalized and not.

How about not capitalizing it, but always putting it in italics?


For example a laboratory information system may have it's own Kanta Medical Records capabilities
and will archive lab results directly to Kanta. It receives encounter id in SMART App Launch
context. Laboratory system can resolve Palvelutapahtuma`s OID identifier by fetching the encounter
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wrong kind of an apostrophe here...


Encounters can be grouped together to form larger administrative 'periods' by using the `partOf`
element. Vendor implementations vary and it's difficult to pinpoint which level (if any) would
match Palvelutapahtuma. For best interoperability we should *not* assume Palvelutapahtuma corresponds
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

SHOULD NOT?

@mikajylha mikajylha closed this Feb 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants