Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for patient vital signs measurements #148

Open
qligier opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 6 comments
Open

Add support for patient vital signs measurements #148

qligier opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 6 comments
Labels
feature request for this/next release on hold depending on other processes vital signs

Comments

@qligier
Copy link
Member

qligier commented Oct 13, 2022

Body weight and height may be needed for the drug dosing.

Should the CH Core Patient be extended and those Observations be added in the contained elements?

Example of body weight coding: https://hl7.org/fhir/observation-example.html

@oliveregger
Copy link
Collaborator

FHIR defines profiles for vitalsigns, e.g. bodyweight is here: http://hl7.org/fhir/StructureDefinition/bodyweight

instead of adding it as contained i would suggest to add them as full resource to the bundle (the observation points to the patient), and maybe add a vital section in the composition to reference it, contained should be only used for resources which have no own existence.

@ziegm
Copy link
Collaborator

ziegm commented Jan 5, 2023

IPAG does not include this for medication. How do we deal with such feature requests?

Should we introduce an additional vitalSigns section in all documents?

@ziegm
Copy link
Collaborator

ziegm commented Jan 12, 2023

12.01. PJ/QL/OE/MZ

  • @pjolo will check it with IPAG

@pjolo
Copy link
Collaborator

pjolo commented Feb 23, 2023

Feedback from IPAG:

  • Would like to leave the eMedication as defined in the IPAG report.
  • The information on height and weight should be available in the primary system and does not need to be shown in the eMedication.
  • Experience should first be gained with the minimal dataset
  • If there are many requests after the establishment, it can be discussed again.

Conclusion:
Vital signs should not be included in the eMedication documents from IPAG's point of view.

@qligier
Copy link
Member Author

qligier commented Feb 24, 2023

I agree that it doesn't have to be added to the minimal dataset yet, but it doesn't cost much to add it to the specifications as a "may support" already.
We have found the patient weight multiple times in our prescription samples, so it seems more important than thought by IPAG.

@ziegm ziegm added on hold depending on other processes and removed clarification by eHS labels Mar 23, 2023
@ziegm ziegm removed this from the STU 4 Ballot milestone Mar 23, 2023
@pjolo
Copy link
Collaborator

pjolo commented Mar 24, 2023

The request will not be implemented as no new information should be included as defined in the IPAG report. The issue will be kept open for future discussion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature request for this/next release on hold depending on other processes vital signs
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants