Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-26079

We recommend fleshig out the incremental exchange process

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

    Details

    • Type: Change Request
    • Status: Applied (View Workflow)
    • Priority: Highest
    • Resolution: Persuasive with Modification
    • Specification:
      US Da Vinci DEQM (FHIR)
    • Raised in Version:
      0.1
    • Work Group:
      Clinical Quality Information
    • Related Page(s):
      (NA)
    • Related Section(s):
      2.2.4
    • Resolution Description:
      Hide

      re: The “incremental” exchange process needs to be better fleshed out. Are we to assume the payer stores pieces of data and matches them up as they are sent by the provider?

      The “incremental” exchange process will be fleshed out for both collect data and submit data scenarios. The payor needs to store data and match them when doing incremental upddates otherwise the Snaphshot updating is used and the payoer discards and replaces the data exchange content for eact interation.

      see ralated trackers: FHIR-26092, FHIR-26076

      re: Does the payer request the specific missing information at some point?

      In Furture version of this guide, the gaps in care section will provide information that describes what the gap is for a patient not in the numerator. which will close that loop.

      Show
      re: The “incremental” exchange process needs to be better fleshed out. Are we to assume the payer stores pieces of data and matches them up as they are sent by the provider? The “incremental” exchange process will be fleshed out for both collect data and submit data scenarios. The payor needs to store data and match them when doing incremental upddates otherwise the Snaphshot updating is used and the payoer discards and replaces the data exchange content for eact interation. see ralated trackers: FHIR-26092 , FHIR-26076 re: Does the payer request the specific missing information at some point? In Furture version of this guide, the gaps in care section will provide information that describes what the gap is for a patient not in the numerator. which will close that loop.
    • Resolution Vote:
      Eric Haas/Linda Michaelsen:28-0-0
    • Change Category:
      Enhancement
    • Change Impact:
      Compatible, substantive

      Description

      The “incremental” exchange process needs to be better fleshed out. Are we to assume the payer stores pieces of data and matches them up as they are sent by the provider? DHow does the provider know if something is missing to calculate the measure? Does the payer request the specific missing information at some point?

      Existing Wording:

      Data Exchange : Note that resources included in a Submit-Data bundle SHOULD be self-contained (in other words, should include all referenced resources in the data), unless the exchange is understood by both parties to be incremental . For example, if an Encounter references a Location, that Location is expected to be included in the bundle, unless the exchange is understood to be incremental and the sending system knows that it has already sent that particular Location as part of a previous submit.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

              People

              Assignee:
              Unassigned Unassigned
              Reporter:
              celine_lefebvre Celine Lefebvre
              Watchers:
              2 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Vote Date: