Hi, Koray

Brazil has the same approach, you know, to usearchetypes to model and IHE 
profiles ( and CDA) to exchange documents,   but we don't have any prior work 
done,  using HL7 v2 or CDA  for exchanging clinical information.  

We're beginning to specify the information model of the two first documents of 
Brazilian national EHR, using international and Nehta CKM archetypes as models 
for  creating the templates and from there to transform them into CDA, which 
will be the exchange format. those are the two first business cases of  the e 
health  platform : hospital discharge summary to primary care, which is 
intended to be a national standard and primary/ community care event summary, 
this one being designed acording  the requirements the primary care team has 
established. 

We still have a discussion on how to transform a openEHR template into CDA, 
possibly we we're going to do per archetype. There's another parallel 
discussion, which is to use simply 13606 or even openEHR extracts instead, and 
to create special IHE profiles in Brazil ( Minas Gerais, as you know has 
deployed a EHR platform using 13606 as exchange format). We volunteered to work 
on the revision of 13606 at ISO, to harmonize the two reference and archetype 
object models, and CDA, so we could create implementation guides to tackle 
this, although there are some of us that think that Brazil has no hl7 legacy, 
so it would be a waste of  time and money to do this transformation. It has 
been a hot discussion among us, and I would wellcome any 
comments or suggestions from the community regarding this.

Recently  we had  a discussion with Charles Parisot and Michael Nussbaum ( IHE) 
on it, Michael is the opinion Brazilian should propose new profiles. Marcelo 
Santos, who was the technical developer of Minas Gerais extracts is now working 
at GE research  and he is currently working  on a IHE openEHR profile, but 
still using CDA as  exchange format. He is contributing to the national 
documents as well, because he is a member of the architecture group of our 
health standards committee and is also one of the experts of the Brazilian  
national eHealth strategy. I think he's the right person to talk in Brazil  on 
this issue.

Regarding to a national CKM, we're pursuing this for a while, you know. The 
state of Minas  Gerais will finally have  CKM service to manage their 
archetypes and we're trying to get a national instance soon. Sam was here 
discussing how to deploy a national instance of CKM with the Institute of 
Technology and Innovation of University of Brasilia, which was contracted to 
develop the National EHR platform, based on SOA architecture.  I'm working with 
them to  create the openehr operational templates for all use cases.  In the 
discharge summary we will use specializations of adverse reactions, medication 
list and allergies CKM Archetypes.  We will need a repository soon to create 
and manage our generated artifacts, therefore we are trying to get MOH as host 
of National CKM,  but are prone to join the Minas gerais one if MOH doesn't 
take over the role. As you know the maturity level, when it concerns to health 
informatics standards at the government IT department is very low, and we have 
some difficulties to convince them to invest in tools and methodologies to 
develop interoperable clinical information systems. It is one of our big 
challenges, and the Institute resolved to assume the job to develop the EHR,  
bringing  together experts, acquiring and  training people in health 
informatics, being  openEHR  one of them. They  intend to  have interchange   
with other national programs that use the same approach, in order to share 
experiences and maybe develop common projects, and NZ is a potential  source of 
knowledge to us. 

Another big challenge  for  us are terminologies, to create the termsets in our 
templates,  then we don't have any clinical terminology in Brazil, not even  a 
medication terminology adequate to be used in clinical information systems. We 
submitted a special project to IHTSDO to begin the translation of SNOMED CT 
with procedures and medications.  Beatriz Leao wants to  use DM+D to do the 
mapping to our national terms, but I prefer to use Australian Medicine 
Terminology instead.  I'd like to know of all of you, which is the better 
choice. I read one NZ paper dedicated to that issue, but it dates back a couple 
of years already, so I'd really appreciate to learn from your experience.

We're definitely going mainstream, I'm very proud to be part of  this community.

Cheers,

Jussara R?tzsch
openEHR Foundation

Enviado via iPad

Em May 30, 2013, ?s 8:16 PM, Koray Atalag <k.atalag at nihi.auckland.ac.nz> 
escreveu:

> Hi All,
>  
> As you may already know New Zealand have decided to used openEHR Archetypes 
> for modelling an Exchange Content Model for the purpose of standardising 
> payload content during health information exchange (HIE). Of course there?s 
> heaps of prior work done, mostly propriety dataset specifications we well as 
> some v2 based constructs and now CDA templates. We also decided to go with 
> CDA as the common payload between systems, preferably with a web-services 
> based connectivity. So ideally the content model will be defined using 
> Archetypes that will then be templated for specific use-cases (e.g. 
> eReferrals) and finally create final CDA payload (as much automatically as we 
> can). And then the propagation of any changes needed in that exchange will be 
> from the Content Model to CDA ? so these will remain linked. However 
> initially we need to run the cycle backwards: I?ve been tasked by the 
> government to review existing CDA templates and former standards and build 
> part of the content model for medication list, allergies and adverse 
> reactions by harmonising with what?s standing out there as good/reusable 
> examples. Of course first place to look at is openEHR and NEHTA CKM but I 
> know a great deal of stuff is also out there. I?m hoping that once we get the 
> essentials done we can resume the normal lifecycle.
>  
> I?d really appreciate if you could share if there?s any relevant work that 
> you think might worth looking at. I?m particularly interested in other 
> national CKM?s. Many thanks in advance.
>  
> Cheers,
>  
> -koray
> www.openehr.org.nz
>  
> Koray Atalag, MD, PhD, FACHI
> Senior Research Fellow
> <image001.jpg>
> School of Population Health, The University of Auckland
> Private Bag 92019 Auckland 1142, New Zealand
> Email: k.atalag at nihi.auckland.ac.nz | Web: www.nihi.auckland.ac.nz
> Skype: atalagk  Mob: 021 02412096  DDI: +64 9 923 7199
> 
> 
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
> database 8394 (20130530) __________
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130531/aa9aee38/attachment.html>

Reply via email to