XMLWordPrintableJSON

Details

    • Icon: Change Request Change Request
    • Resolution: Not Persuasive with Modification
    • Icon: Highest Highest
    • US Da Vinci CDex (FHIR)
    • 2.0.0-ballot
    • Patient Care
    • STU
    • Background
    • 2.5
    • Hide

      There will continue to be situations even with a fully implemented CRD and DTR system. (which will reduce practitioner burden through automation).  Another mechanism for requesting attachments will be needed for those cases that are not processed through a PAS end-to-end workflow or for when Providers miss or fail to submit requested documents.

      see attachment for updated guidance.

      Show
      There will continue to be situations even with a fully implemented CRD and DTR system. (which will reduce practitioner burden through automation).  Another mechanism for requesting attachments will be needed for those cases that are not processed through a PAS end-to-end workflow or for when Providers miss or fail to submit requested documents. see attachment for updated guidance.
    • Eric Haas/Jay Lyle: 7-0-0
    • Clarification
    • Non-substantive

    Description

      The examples in section 2.5 suggest that Cdex is a catch-all for any use case where people aren't using the more appropriate/specific guide. We are concerned physicians will have to deal with attachment requests because payers haven't built out sophisticated CRD or DTR. Do we need language here indicating to protect against Cdex being a way to bypass implementation of more appropriate guides?

      Attachments

        Activity

          People

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

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: