FHIR Chat · Representing a patient's PCP · implementers

Stream: implementers

Topic: Representing a patient's PCP


view this post on Zulip Shobana (May 31 2019 at 18:35):

Hi, I am a FHIR newbie working on converting EHR data that is in CSV files to FHIR.

In one of these csv files, I have a patient id along with their PCP's name, NPI number and a "Spec" which has values like "Family Medicine". My initial thought was to model these as Patient and Practitioner, where I would have patient.generalPractitioner point to the Practitioner resource. However, there does not seem to be a way to represent the PCP relationship there. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I am now considering modeling this as Patient, Practitioner and PractitionerRole. What is the right way to configure the references across those 3 resources? For example, should patient.generalPractitioner point to Practitioner or PractitionerRole?

p.s. @Lloyd McKenzie since you had specific recommendations on the "PractitionerRole.Practitioner" thread about this.

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (May 31 2019 at 19:10):

Patient has a "generalPractitioner" element that lets you link a Patient to PractitionerRole. PractitionerRole can then point to Practitioner

view this post on Zulip Shobana (May 31 2019 at 19:35):

Ok, thanks. I will then create a Patient resource for each patient and create both PractitionerRole and Practitioner for each of the PCPs and have them referenced as Patient->PractitionerRole->Practitioner.

Next question, what is the right way to represent their NPI? I found 2 ways of doing this:
"identifier": [
## Option 1
{
"system": "https://npiregistry.cms.hhs.gov/",
"value": "1234567890"
},
## Option 2
{
"type": {
"coding": [
{
"system": "http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v2-0203",
"code": "NPI"
}
]
},
"system": "http://hl7.org/fhir/sid/us-npi",
"value": "1234567890"
},
],

Are they both correct? Is one more correct than the other?

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (May 31 2019 at 19:37):

The first is fine. The second may be more useful to systems that don't recognize the Identifier.system

view this post on Zulip Shobana (May 31 2019 at 19:48):

Hopefully last question on this - would the right way to represent the "Family Medicine" be to assign the Snomed ct code for Family Practice (419772000) to PractitionerRole.specialty?

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (May 31 2019 at 20:07):

It's impressively right :)

Most implementers would just shove the string value into Practitioner.specialty.text. (Though I'd encourage you to send the text element too for fall back.)


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC