Stream: implementers
Topic: Extension with code and display value
Mark Sternig (Apr 10 2019 at 02:34):
In our implementation of a FHIR Appointment resource, we wish to add an extension that represents an "internal" appointmentType (different from the standard appointment types in FHIR. This would give us a way to display the id/code and display value for the appointment type from the source system. In the past, we have used an extension with a valueString, which was set to the ID/code. Our customer would also like to have the actual display value included. We were looking at using valueCode as an option to show both the ID and Display fro certain fields. Any guidance? Is there a better way?
"extension": [{
"url": "https://blahblah.com/fhir/extensions/appointment/ehrAppointmentType",
"valueCoding":
{
"code" : "123456",
"display" : "New Patient Visit"
}
}]
Grahame Grieve (Apr 10 2019 at 03:00):
yes that's pretty much the option. though you should have a populated system value for stability
Lloyd McKenzie (Apr 10 2019 at 03:03):
The system value can be any URL that you control and that represents the set of codes for "your" appointment types.
Lloyd McKenzie (Apr 10 2019 at 03:04):
(Though if it resolves to something that shows the list of codes and their meanings, that's a significant plus for developers.)
Mark Sternig (Apr 10 2019 at 03:42):
Is the "system" required? The code/display values are typically different for each client, and can vary based on values that are entered into the EHR system. For example, the client may add a new appointment type, so the list of possible values is not static like some of the ValueSets or CodeSystems would be.
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Apr 10 2019 at 04:25):
In coding system is optional.
When capturing legacy data the system may be unknown.
With new work having a value for system is a great idea, as the cost is low and it makes the record easier to use outside its original context.
Mark Sternig (Apr 10 2019 at 13:54):
Ok, one last question (hopefully)... if we use an extension to represent a code/display value, should we use the same url for the system? Looking at the Cerner R4 guide, they seem to have created their own code sets and have a specific url for each set, but I'm not sure we are in a position to do that quite yet.
"extension": [{
"url": "https://blahblah.com/fhir/extensions/appointment/ehrAppointmentType",
"valueCoding":
{
"system": "https://blahblah.com/fhir/extensions/appointment/ehrAppointmentType",
"code" : "123456",
"display" : "New Patient Visit"
}
}]
Michel Rutten (Apr 10 2019 at 14:03):
Hi @Mark Sternig, extension url and code system url are different concepts, you cannot use one for the other.
Brian Postlethwaite (Apr 22 2019 at 13:33):
I'd be putting your internal form of appointment type as an alternative coding in the CodeableConcept.
As noted by others, this would have a customer specific system value in it in your case.
Dont think you need an extension here.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
