Stream: implementers
Topic: practitioner
Neil Robinson (Feb 02 2018 at 08:54):
Starting real deployments of FHIR via IHE MHD. Run into the absence of practitionerRole from document.reference.author . Can see this is in in the "build" version but now with a remnamed root of agent. However not in encounter.particicpant. Somewhat perplexed/upset/other negtive adjectives that there are so many changes in root names. NOT HELPFUL in order to be compliant every change is a recode for users - as far as I can see. Any advice comment
Lloyd McKenzie (Feb 02 2018 at 15:10):
The root names are changing as part of an effort to increase consistency across resources. We're not forcing consistency - it's up to each work group to decide whether they have unique requirements that justifies having a distinct name. However, we're nudging in that direction where the only reason for distinct names is that the artifacts were created by different groups. We realize this has an impact on existing implementers, but we're also trying to design for long-term implementation. When we make these changes for widely implemented artifacts (FMM level 4/5), we do consult with the implementation community first and their opinion is taken into account. This consistency effort is also working to propagate PractitionerRole everywhere it makes sense too. You should see that in the version of the resources that comes out in the April ballot. (And if you're not happy with the changes, you can absolutely share that feedback as a ballot response.
Brian Postlethwaite (Feb 02 2018 at 16:03):
Or if practitionerrole isn't in places where you think it should be, please log it via the link at the bottom of the page in the spec.
(don't have to wait for ballot to do that)
Varvara (Oct 18 2019 at 13:06):
Hello, wondering if there is a reason why Practitioner resource doesn't have 'specialty' attribute?
Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 18 2019 at 14:10):
@Brian Postlethwaite
Brian Postlethwaite (Oct 18 2019 at 21:37):
Thus is on the practitioner role resource, as the specialty is applied to places where they work.
Varvara (Oct 19 2019 at 00:27):
@Brian Postlethwaite isn't specialty is something that relates to a person education? it's just seems like I have to use PractitonerRole resource for patient's PCP only because it has specialty attribute. I agree that practitioner may have several specialties which are applicable in different cases, but at the same time all these specialties are related to the person as well, or am I missing something here ?
Brian Postlethwaite (Oct 19 2019 at 03:38):
We have also considered putting it under the qualification, as it would be relevant to that, in recording something that needs to be checked/tracked with registrations and expiries etc.
But for searching in a directory, or ensuring the details of a clinic are right, we really care about what the are employed to do at a place.
Doesn't matter if the practitioner had a specialty in paediatrics if he's working in an aged care facility 3 days a week, and in community clinics 2 days.
Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 19 2019 at 11:23):
It would be good to note that when specialties represent 'education, they should be captured as qualifications, whereas PractitionerRole.specialty represents functional role.
Brian Postlethwaite (Oct 20 2019 at 00:26):
That would a be good inclusion. Can you log it and I'll ensure appropriate text goes into r5
Lloyd McKenzie (Oct 20 2019 at 01:50):
https://gforge.hl7.org/gf/project/fhir/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=25033
Brian Postlethwaite (Oct 20 2019 at 04:18):
Thanks.
rekha (Oct 30 2019 at 06:21):
Hi All,
A Practitioner consists of different CareTeams,which resource is used to capture different CareTeams?Can anyone suggest me??
Thanks in advance.
Richard Townley-O'Neill (Oct 30 2019 at 06:27):
@rekha
CareTeam lists the members of the team. The members may be Practitioners.
David Hay (Oct 30 2019 at 19:52):
It would be good to note that when specialties represent 'education, they should be captured as qualifications, whereas PractitionerRole.specialty represents functional role.
Isn't there an overlap with code (role) here? In our implementation, we've decided to remove specialty in favour of code ('role') to avoid confusion...
Anne Goodwin (Oct 30 2019 at 20:10):
And in the implementation David refers to we are also adding an extension to practitioner for the pratitioner's "scope of practice" which is assigned by our medical licensing agencies and is essentially the specialty they are qualified to practice. A practitioner can have many scopes of practice.
James Derrickson (Feb 14 2020 at 15:50):
Are there any code table standards to handle insurance identifiers for the practitioner resource?
John Moehrke (Feb 14 2020 at 15:51):
Sounds like a question for the #Da Vinci stream.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
