Stream: implementers
Topic: reasonCode vs. reasonReference
Charles Frankston (Apr 01 2020 at 15:31):
In Appointments, Encounters, and ServiceRequests Is there any semantic difference between a reasonCode and a reasonReference that might refer to a Condition or Procedure? If all I have is the code and a display value (and maybe text), it's easier to fill in the reasonCode CodeableConcept than create a minimal Condition or Procedure.
Also, I presume that it's acceptable to use ICD10 codes for the condition when SNOMED codes are not available?
Vassil Peytchev (Apr 01 2020 at 15:45):
There is no semantic difference, and in fact, there is a new data type to reflect this, CodeableReference. In all three resources, .reason is of this data type, if you look at build.fhir.org.
There is no required binding for the value set, so yes, you can use ICD-10 codes.
Charles Frankston (Apr 01 2020 at 16:11):
But the R4 documentation for Encounter, Appointment, and ServiceRequest (and perhaps others?) still has reasonCode and reasonReference. Are you saying the next FHIR version will replace both of these with CodeableReference? But for R4 still need to use reasonCode and/or reasonReference?
Lloyd McKenzie (Apr 01 2020 at 16:58):
Correct
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
