Stream: smart/health-cards
Topic: Self performed RAT
Grahame Grieve (Nov 10 2021 at 01:16):
Has anyone discussed what it would mean to produce SHCs for self-performed RAT tests for covid?
if your knee-jerk reaction is 'no way': what kind of record do you think - if any - people should be able to produce?
Grahame Grieve (Nov 10 2021 at 01:18):
what about employer administered tests?
Josh Mandel (Nov 10 2021 at 02:08):
For observed self performed tests, we've discussed metadata. I think "purely self reported" was one of the options -- https://github.com/HL7/fhir-shc-vaccination-ig/issues/165#issuecomment-888480678
Grahame Grieve (Nov 10 2021 at 06:21):
right. but who would issue a card like that, and what kind of procedures would they need around id verification for the commons project to add them to the directory?
JP Pollak (Nov 10 2021 at 15:30):
interesting question. i don't think many organizations meeting the current VCI Directory inclusion criteria would be issuing SHCs for fully self-administered tests.
i know that some current issuers are or are contemplating issuing SHCs for observed self-performed tests via telemedicine visit (per Josh's comment).
i would not be surprised if a pharmacy or lab started issuing SHCs for tests done with self-administered sample collection kits.
i could very much imagine test kit makers with mobile apps wanting to go this route, but we haven't contemplated adding orgs of that type in the directory at this point.
Grahame Grieve (Nov 10 2021 at 21:14):
well, I have a query from an importer in Australia who's interested in this - pure retail, wants to provide after-market service, including sharing test outcomes for integration into workflow e.g. entry into a retirement home etc
Paul Denning (Nov 16 2021 at 17:37):
https://jira.hl7.org/browse/PSS-1883 perhaps relevant At-Home Test Result Reporting project proposal
draft PSS at https://jira.hl7.org/browse/PSS-1892
Isaac Vetter (Nov 16 2021 at 21:18):
Hey @Matt Rahn , @Gay Dolin -- are you standardizing the specimen collection supervision status in v2 as part of this spec? If not, would you consider doing so?
Isaac Vetter (Nov 16 2021 at 21:18):
Neelima proposed a reasonable valueset of
lab-collect | individual-collect-unobserved | individual-collect-virtual-observed | individual-collect-in-person-observed
Isaac Vetter (Nov 16 2021 at 21:18):
A known supervision method for specimen collection for COVID-19 lab tests is more important than for an average lab tests.
Grahame Grieve (Nov 17 2021 at 00:40):
urine drug tests!
Andrea Pitkus, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, CSM (Dec 22 2021 at 03:03):
Actually the validity of any lab test which is consumer performed can be called into question. Supervision of performance by a health professional helps ensure the specimen is collected from the patient appropriately and not their dog, swabbing their ear, etc. "Trust" is vital for health professionals who want to stake clinical decision making on consumer performed testing, and why even for a pregnancy test, most providers confirm by a health professional (lab) performed test. There are medical legal implications too.
Andrea Pitkus, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, CSM (Dec 22 2021 at 03:09):
Consumer testing can be performed for urine drug screens, genetic tests (ancestry, marketing for strength, fitness, etc.), home CBC-White cell count for oncology patients, urinalysis dip stick, pregnancy, COVID, etc to name a few.
Andrea Pitkus, PhD, MLS(ASCP)CM, CSM (Dec 22 2021 at 03:13):
Specimen Collection info is typically in the Specimen Resource and Specimen DAM.
Grahame Grieve (Dec 22 2021 at 07:38):
of course. Specially when the consumer has a vested interest in a negative test - just don't sample properly and bingo!
Grahame Grieve (Dec 22 2021 at 07:38):
but that's not our problem here - our problem here is just to allow faithful recording of what was done, so that people can make the right decisions
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
