Stream: Da Vinci PCT
Topic: Harmonization between CARIN BB and PCT IG mappings?
Amol Vyas (Nov 23 2021 at 21:28):
Hi all,
Based on the concerns raised by @Pat Taylor , @Sam Undine , and others, I agree with Pat on exploring harmonization between the mapping approaches between CARIN BB and PCT IGs. The worry is that anything that adds to the FHIR mapping and implementation work that Payers (and Apps) have already done under the CMS Patient Access API mandate, may take away from the FHIR adoption momentum we've achieved so far (especially given that FHIR is optional for the PCT mandate). Other thoughts welcome. @Viet Nguyen , @Vanessa Candelora , @MaryKay McDaniel , @Larry Decelles , @Tony Benson , @Michael Gould , @Linda , @Gary Gryan , @Caleb Wan , @Durwin Day
Viet Nguyen (Nov 24 2021 at 04:19):
Given the deadlines that we have for the PCT January Ballot, I suggest the following:
- A freeze on any changes to the PCT January ballot version so that we can get something for the community to comment.
- Initiate an analysis of the IGs to create a specific list of items (profiles, extension, valuesets) that overlap. This could be started now and be provided as specific feedback to the IG ballot along with justification so the community can evaluate the importance, necessity and implementability of each item.
- Along with 2, we need a recommendation of the harmonization approach.
Who can support this analysis?
There's a balance between minimizing profile proliferation, while recognizing that new profiles must be created if existing one do not support the data and workflow needs of new IGs. I would also like feedback from other, non-BCBSA payers as to the need, utility and feasibility of any harmonization that we pursue.
Pat Taylor (Dec 08 2021 at 16:26):
@Viet Nguyen Viet, I can help support the analysis @Amol Vyas @Corey Spears
Last updated: Apr 12 2022 at 19:14 UTC
