Care Plan Team Meeting (As updated during meeting)

1. NOTES: Action items can be found on slide 27 This document will be updated and polished over a few meetings. Care Plan Team Meeting(As updated during meeting) André Boudreau (a.boudreau@boroan.ca) Laura Heermann Langford (Laura.Heermann@imail.org) 2011-02-09 (1) HL7 Patient Care Work group

2. Participants- Meetg of 2011-02-09

3. Participants- Profile notes - 1

4. Participants- Profile notes - 2

5. Meeting(s) Objectives • Agree on where we are and where we want to go • Agree on the approach to get there • Identify what is available and what is missing • Identify tasks and develop realistic work plan • Agree on roles and mechanics

6. Agenda – (multiple meetings) • Welcome and roll call • Objectives of the meeting • Care plan status update • Objectives of this phase • Methodology to be followed • What has been done • Gaps • Team and roles • Conclusion • Next steps • Next meetings

7. Care Plan Status Update

8. Where we are • We have a Care Plan DSTU • We have an approved March 2010 Project Scope Statement • Questions were raised and discussed regarding development processes, artefacts to be created and the types of ballots • Use cases and storyboards have been collected • Some are on the wiki and HL7 PC WG page • Not standardized, not reviewed • More would be available • Canada (Blueprint 2015) • We have details on the methodology (see later) • Ask William Goossen for more details (add on next page)

9. Where we are (William?)

10. Notes from Jay Lile – 2011-02-03 • INFORMATION: The DAM should inform a constrained model (DIM/DMIM/RMIM), which is then used as the basis for specifications (CDA, message, etc.). If we build a DAM, we'll presumably use it to update the Care Provision DIM. The updated DIM should be in the list of balloted deliverables. (This is much clearer in PSS 4d, but the sections should be in harmony.) • SCOPE ISSUE: We will also need to determine whether the DAM scope should be restricted to the care plan or should reverse-engineer the entire Care Provision DIM.  • PSS (Project Scope Statement) UPDATE: The Scope section (4a) discusses semantic scope, but it does not lay out the scope of work. I'd suggest that the text currently in 2a be removed from 2a, expanded, and added to 4a.  • GUIDELINE: The term "DSTU" is being used to refer to deliverables. I find that confusing: DSTU is a status, not an artifact. It would be clearer to me if artifacts were referred to as messages, cda documents, DAMs, and DIMs, and ballot status were used to modify those artifacts. E.g., "the purpose of this project is to develop a Care Plan CDA document, with all necessary antecedent artifacts [list them], and to ballot this document as DSTU."  • DELIVERABLES: Modeling the information space will almost certainly be useful, but I'm still in the dark about the use cases.  Under what circumstances is it necessary to communicate a care plan? For what business purpose are organizations paying their employees to volunteer and develop this standard?  • PSS UPDATE: External collaboration (6) could use more detail. That would also make it less necessary to mention this slightly distracting information in previous sections.

11. Where we want to be (target)

12. Objectives of this phase • Get more familiar with HL7 chain of deliverables (HDF) • Consolidate and clarify business and clinical requirements • Under what circumstances is it necessary to communicate a care plan? • Include clinical guidelines • Distributed care planning as in Sweden: meta data needed • For what business purpose are organizations paying their employees to volunteer and develop this standard? • Scope: decide whether the DAM scope should be restricted to the care plan or should reverse-engineer the entire Care Provision DIM • Assemble use cases and analyze • ?Develop DAM • Update objectives once we have a better handle on our methods

13. Deliverables (to be updated after a few weeks of travel…) • NB: Care Plan wiki to be used for all documents • Laura and André to manage? • See HDF Domain Analysis- later • Project Scope Statement • Eventually… • DAM • storyboard, use cases, structural models, dynamicmodels • Care Plan CDA? • Care Plan v3 message?

14. Methodology: How to get there

15. Guidelines • Use approved HL7 methods: HDF- DAP • All agree • We need to familiarize ourselves with the approach • Resources • HDF_1.5.doc (Jan 2010) • CIC DAM Development Guide HL7 PC Cambridge 2010.pptx • Format for use cases, storyboards, activity diagrams and interaction diagrams - HL7Wiki.mht • Examples • EMS Domain Analysis Model VOORBEELD.pdf

16. HDF- Domain Analysis Overview Source: HDF_1.5.doc, page 37

17. What has been done

18. What do we have (assets) • Approved PSS that needs revision when we are ready • Use cases and storyboards (next page) • Glossaries: HL7, EHR WG • CEN Continuity of care P1 and P2 • CEN docs are published • Information model and processes and workflow • Care plan DSTU of 2007 • IHE models of the PPOC (Patient Plan of Care) • To be updated with a good inventory (see next page) • NB: we need all the assets in one location (or at least links to other locations would be found in that spot)

19. Use Cases and Storyboards on Hand • Care Plan Storyboards - HL7Wiki.mht • Care Plan Use cases - HL7Wiki.mht • CarePlanPneumoniaStoryboard.doc • Goossenetal2004Jamia-nursingprocessHL7-186.pdf • Care coordination usecases v-9 IHE Australia.doc • CarePlanTopicUseCasesDiabetesCare22-11-2010.doc • IHE-PCC_Profile-Proposal_Chronic_Care_Coordination-1-AU.doc • To be updated

20. Gaps and workplan

21. Gaps

22. Workplan • High level here, comprehensive on Excel • There was a work plan • PC CarePlanTopic Planning & Controllist_v02.xls

23. Team and Roles

24. Team and Roles (WIP)

25. Team and Roles- Notes • Resource issue - the need to fill the roles of HL7 modeling and vocabfacilitators to progress the works

26. CONCLUSION

27. Concluding notes • Approach is OK • Have 1 or 2 or 3 more calls to sort ourselves out • Weekly calls at 17h00 ET

28. Issues/Questions as of 2011-02-09

29. Action Items as of 2011-02-09