FHIR Chat · Healthcare Facility Patient Care Location (HSLOC) external c

Stream: terminology

Topic: Healthcare Facility Patient Care Location (HSLOC) external c

Carol Macumber (Aug 11 2020 at 16:59):

The HTA has worked with CDC NHSN to document the Healthcare Facility Patient Care Location (HSLOC) external code system information. In doing so, the following implementations utlizing HSLOC have been noted -

NHSN Healthcare Associated Infection (HAI) Reports Long Term Care Facilities (HAI-LTCF-FHIR), Release 1 - US Realm identifies this code system as http://hl7.org/fhir/us/hai-ltcf/CodeSystem/2.16.840.1.113883.6.259
Name: HSLOC
Title: NHSN Healthcare Facility Patient Care Location
Version: 0.1.0
The value set NHSNHealthcareServiceLocationCode, canonical ID: http://hl7.org/fhir/us/hai-ltcf/ValueSet/2.16.840.1.113883.13.19, uses a specific version of the code system 2020-01-01
NOTE: that is not the version of the code system resource included in the IG and needs to be addressed

HealthcareAssociatedInfectionReports Implementation Guide CI Build Identifies this code system as http://hl7.org/fhir/us/hai/CodeSystem/2.16.840.1.113883.6.259
Name: HSLOC
Title: NHSN Healthcare Facility Patient Care Location
Version: 2.0.0
The value set NHSNHealthcareServiceLocationCode, canonical ID: http://hl7.org/fhir/us/hai/ValueSet/2.16.840.1.113883.13.19, does not use a specific version of the code system.

The following identifiers will be supported in the UTG Naming System
1) https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/cdaportal/terminology/codesystem/hsloc - preferred
2) http://hl7.org/fhir/us/hai/CodeSystem/2.16.840.1.113883.6.259
3) 2.16.840.1.113883.6.259

@Robert McClure @Ted Klein @Jessica Snell @Julie James

Grahame Grieve (Aug 11 2020 at 17:29):

Thanks @Carol Macumber. There's something here I'm not sure about is how the versioning works. Both the cited versions above, the version is the version of the Implementation Guide (0.1.0 and 2.0.0), not the version of the code system. What is the correct way to version the code system? And is UTG going to include the source of this code system?

Carol Macumber (Aug 12 2020 at 16:50):

@Robert McClure composed the historical information. @Robert McClure can you comment?
I would assume that a convenience copy will be made available as part of UTG. At the very least, the CS stub. Though that's a great question as we haven't been doing that as a default. @Ted Klein ?

Ted Klein (Aug 12 2020 at 18:38):

A policy decision joint HTA/Vocab: should we always create a CS stub (no content) for a registered=with-HTA external CS? And what do we do about the issues with the Publisher and the build if there is a stub for a CS where we also have content in the infrastructure? (ie LOINC, SNOMED, etc). If we want ONLY the NamingSystem entry instead, then we need to enhance NS for some of the documentation that is missing (e.g. IP and copyright info) which is why I added the stubs initially - the information required for the generated coremif for external code systems has no home for all of it in NamingSystem. Additionally, what about externals where we have content? I am thinking especially about the activity underway with ADA for SNODENT right now,

Grahame Grieve (Aug 12 2020 at 20:40):

publisher + validator know to ignore stubs when there is content in the infrastructure. I will do the same for the main build

Carol Macumber (Aug 19 2020 at 11:52):

@Ted Klein The URL is now functional - but noting that it ends in .html and does not redirect without
https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/cdaportal/terminology/codesystem/hsloc.html

David Pyke (Jul 27 2021 at 14:24):

Just to dig this up and ask, is it likely that HSLOC will be added to THO with more than a stub? the SANER FHIR wants to be published soon but none of the HSLOC codes validate as the codesystem in THO is still <content value="not-present"/>