Stream: Canadian HealthcareService Directory
Topic: Use of Healthcareservice.specialty
Tim Berezny (Sep 28 2020 at 14:02):
Is the intended use of HealthcareService.specialty rigidly tied to the idea of clinical specialties of practitioners?
We have a desire to add a concept of "specialties" to a service that may be something different, and i'm trying to figure out if we should use the specialty field (which has a preferred value set), or take another approach:
For long term care: Reunification bed, smoking bed, etc...
For orthopaedic specialists: hand, foot, shoulder, etc...
For physiotherapist: motor vehicle accidents, sports injury, acupuncture, etc...
For meals on wheels: Hot meals, cold meals, etc...
I think of these as more detailed information that is a bit more precise than what a "Service listings" in a directory might be. Kind of like searching for a hair-dresser, but only some will do a perm.
I'm currently considering the following alternatives:
- Create a "Service options" extension
- Use "HealthcareService.Characteristics"
- Use Healthcareservice.type (which is already being used for the main taxonomy classification like "orthopaedic specialist", "physiotherapist", "meals on wheels".
- Use Healthcareservice.specialty, (throwing the preferred valueset out the window.)
Thoughts?
Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 28 2020 at 14:14):
This doesn't seem like a Canadian-specific question? Might be best to ask on the #implementers stream
Tim Berezny (Sep 28 2020 at 14:15):
Should re-post it or does tagging #implementers do the trick?
Lloyd McKenzie (Sep 28 2020 at 14:42):
I'd re-post. I doubt most implementers would want to subscribe here to participate in the discussion.
Tim Berezny (Sep 28 2020 at 20:54):
re-posted here:
https://chat.fhir.org/#narrow/stream/179166-implementers/topic/Use.20of.20HealthcareService.2Especialty/near/211549053
Brian Postlethwaite (Sep 28 2020 at 23:20):
I would have suggested that characteristics would be appropriate there.
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
