FHIR Chat · numberOfRepeatsAllowed cannot be zero · implementers

Stream: implementers

Topic: numberOfRepeatsAllowed cannot be zero


view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Apr 07 2017 at 02:34):

numberOfRepeatsAllowed cannot be 0 since the type is positiveInt. Soooo how does one represent the concept of zero refills using MedRequest? I vaguely remember this discussion somewhere before but cannot find any reference to it.

view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Apr 07 2017 at 02:38):

Also looking at the MedRequest extensions found this infusion duration which really seems to overlap with the Timing.repeat.duration. The description for the Timing element is
"How long this thing happens for when it happens." sounds like an infusion time to me.....

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Apr 07 2017 at 02:45):

What's the use-case for "zero fills"?

view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Apr 07 2017 at 03:15):

not zero fills but zero *refills*. "An integer indicating the number of times, in addition to the original dispense, (aka refills or repeats) that the patient can receive the prescribed medication"

view this post on Zulip Lloyd McKenzie (Apr 07 2017 at 04:03):

Ah, missed that. Yes, that absolutely needs to be able to be 0. Wow. I guess the presumption is that if number of refills is 0, you omit the element. However, it'd be very good to have that made explicit in the usage notes. Do you want to submit a change request?

view this post on Zulip Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Apr 07 2017 at 13:53):

@Eric Haas Regarding your other question, our implementation uses timing.repeat.duration for the infuse over duration. We do not use the extension. Dosage.dose_x_ has a comment that seems to support using timing as well:

If the administration is not intended to be instantaneous (rate is present or timing has a duration), this can be specified to convey the total amount to be administered over the period of time as indicated by the schedule e.g. 500 ml in dose, with timing used to convey that this should be done over 4 hours.

view this post on Zulip Eric Haas (Apr 07 2017 at 14:30):

GF#13182 , GF#13183

view this post on Zulip Michelle (Moseman) Miller (Apr 07 2017 at 15:49):

FYI - it looks like GF#13183 should have been GF#13184


Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC