Specification - Extended

HL7 CDA® R2 Implementation Guide: C-CDA Templates for Clinical Notes Companion Guide, Release 2 STU - US Realm

Document Description

extended per TSC vote https://confluence.hl7.org/x/Ujb9Aw

Existing Wording

C-CDA Content Creators SHOULD include an identifier for the provider organization in the id/@extension attribute and SHOULD identify the assigning authority for the identifier using a globally unique identifier (GUID or OID) in the id/@root attribute. [CONF-036] C-CDA Content Creators SHOULD include in the patientRole a corresponding id/@root attribute using the same globally unique identifier. The id/@extension attribute SHOULD include the medical record number (MRN) assigned for the patient within the provider’s organization. [CONF-037]

Proposed Wording

C-CDA Content Creators SHOULD include an identifier for the provider organization in the id/@extension attribute and SHOULD identify the assigning authority for the identifier using a globally unique identifier (GUID or OID) in the id/@root attribute. [CONF-036] C-CDA Content Creators MAY include in the patientRole a corresponding id/@root attribute using the same globally unique identifier. The id/@extension attribute SHOULD include the medical record number (MRN) assigned for the patient within the provider’s organization. [CONF-037] It seems too strong to say that a patientRole/id/@root SHOULD match the providerOrganization/id/@root given how often an id/@root is an OID representing "what type of id is this?" (For example, if an id has a @root="2.16.840.1.113883.4.1" then it corresponds to the question "what's the patient's Social Security Number?" and the @extension is the answer.) Given that, I'd expect that in a lot of cases, the providerOrganization/id/@root will be an OID representing "which organization is this?" If that's the case, then it would make no sense for the patientRole/id/@root to be the same, since an organization's ID and a patient's MRN are apples and oranges.