Uploaded image for project: 'FHIR Specification Feedback'
  1. FHIR Specification Feedback
  2. FHIR-28398

Request for supporting 'Location' in Task.location

    XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive with Modification
    • Icon: Medium Medium
    • FHIR Core (FHIR)
    • R4
    • Orders & Observations
    • Task
    • Hide

      Additional update: The Transport resource now exists (FMM 0). 

      Recommendation from FHIR-I workflow group:

      Task.location indicates the 'primary' location associated with the execution of the Task (if there is one).  For an appointment, the location is just one of a set of entities that can be 'booked'.  Task isn't being used in the same way.  For most resources where Location is used (e.g. Procedure, Encounter, MedicationDispense, etc.) Location is 0..1.

      If you're trying to define a Task seeking to represent a transfer from one location to another, those locations would need to be identified as separate Task.inputs because there'd be a need to differentiate them.  (Also, be aware that there's work underway for a 'Transport' resource and possibly a corresponding request that will better support transfers.)

      Proposed change:

      Clarify Task.location to have usage notes saying "This should only be specified when the Task to be/being performed happens or is expected to happen primarily within the bounds of a single Location.  Other locations (e.g. source, destination, etc.) would either be reflected on the 'basedOn' Request or be conveyed as distinct Task.input values."

      Show
      Additional update: The Transport resource now exists (FMM 0).  Recommendation from FHIR-I workflow group: Task.location indicates the 'primary' location associated with the execution of the Task (if there is one).  For an appointment, the location is just one of a set of entities that can be 'booked'.  Task isn't being used in the same way.  For most resources where Location is used (e.g. Procedure, Encounter, MedicationDispense, etc.) Location is 0..1. If you're trying to define a Task seeking to represent a transfer from one location to another, those locations would need to be identified as separate Task.inputs because there'd be a need to differentiate them.  (Also, be aware that there's work underway for a 'Transport' resource and possibly a corresponding request that will better support transfers.) Proposed change: Clarify Task.location to have usage notes saying "This should only be specified when the Task to be/being performed happens or is expected to happen primarily within the bounds of a single Location.  Other locations (e.g. source, destination, etc.) would either be reflected on the 'basedOn' Request or be conveyed as distinct Task.input values."
    • JD Nolen / Dan Rutz : 10 - 0 - 4
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive
    • R5

    Description

      At Present Task resource has provision to define a single location for it with 'Task.location'.

      Just like appointment there can be multiple locations involved in a Task for say movement of equipments etc.

      hence it shall support multiple locations.

        

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

            jdlnolen John D.L. Nolen
            ssharma5 Shubham Sharma (Inactive)
            Watchers:
            3 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: