LRI+-+UCR+Workgroup+Charter+-+Consensus+Page

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="LRI Header"

LRI Use Case and Requirements Workgroup Charter - Call for Consensus
CDC/OSELS/PHITPO || Yes with comment || Add Laboratory Information System (LIS) / Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) vendors and Health Information Exchanges(HIE) and Regional Health Information Organzations (RHIO) as key stakeholders. || ‘#’Time Reduction to Create a New Lab Interface ‘#’ Cost Reduction to Create a New Lab Interface Need to clarify if the success is measured on the vendor side, or on the client side
 * = **WG Member** ||= **Organization** ||= **Endorsement**
 * (Yes or No)** ||= **If No, what can be changed to make it Yes?** ||
 * Andrea Pitkus || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * Arturo Sanchez || U. of North Florida - School of Computing ||  ||   ||
 * AustinKreisler || SAIC || Yes with comment || We definitely need to clarify the definition of "structured data" in the context of lab results. The clear definition in the context of this use case can be done in the Use Case Glossary, but we will want to link the terms use in the charter and elsewhere in the use case to the definition in the glossary. ||
 * Brian Ahier || Oregon HIE Technology Workgroup || Yes ||  ||
 * Carrie Adams || NeHII ||  ||   ||
 * Cindy Vinion || Northrop Grumman Information Technology,
 * David Cheng || IBM ||  ||   ||
 * Eric Heflin || Medicity ||  ||   ||
 * Ernest Grove || Secure Hitech LLC ||  ||   ||
 * Freida Hall || Quest Diagnostics, Incorporated || Yes ||  ||
 * Gary Dickinson || CentriHealth ||  ||   ||
 * Glen Moy || California HealthCare Foundation || Yes ||  ||
 * Hans Buitendijk || Siemens || Yes with comment || As we progress we need to reduce ambiguity of what "structured data" means as it currently has different meanings to different people/systems. For example, some lab results may be sent as a text block in one OBX or fully decomposed into multiple, "sub-ided" OBXes using SNs instead of STs, etc., etc. ||
 * Jim Carlson || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * Jim Harrison || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * John Ritter || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * JonahFrohlich || Manatt Health Solutions ||  ||   ||
 * Julie Cantor-Weinberg, MPP || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * Kathy Walsh || LabCorp || Yes ||  ||
 * Ken McCaslin || Quest Diagnostics, Incorporated || Yes ||  ||
 * Ken Willett || Ignis Systems || Yes ||  ||
 * Lester Keeper Jr. || Secure Hitech LLC ||  ||   ||
 * Lorre Pacheco || Sunquest Information Systems ||  ||   ||
 * Mary McGinnis || Illinois Office of Health Information Exchange (OHIT) ||  ||   ||
 * Nick VanDuyne || NYeC ||  ||   ||
 * Nikolay Lipskiy || CDC ||  ||   ||
 * Paul Edge || Microsoft ||  ||   ||
 * Randolph Sanks, MBA || Deloitte (Health and Life Sciences) || Yes ||  ||
 * Robert Dieterle || Cal eConnect ||  ||   ||
 * Robert Hausam, MD || HL7 ||  ||   ||
 * Riki Merrick || iConnect Consulting || Yes with comments || For the success criteria

For deliverables: Need to adjust the final due dates for Lab results interface use case template draft For stakeholders: Need definition for Consumers - there seems to be overlap with patients, providers, laboratories, hospital organizations || After the first two paragraphs, they are really discussing the Lab Result Initiative not the Use Case Workgroup. Move this up to the Lab Initiative section.. This applies to all workgroups || CHIC, NWHIN, and MITA TAC ||  ||   || //There are at least two standard specifications for ambulatory laboratory reporting, neither of which are adopted universally across industry// It should be rephrased to say something like this: //There are at least two implementation guides for ambulatory laboratory reporting both of which are using the HL7 V2 messaging standard, but neither of which is adopted universally across the industry.//
 * Robert Lutolf || Gensa Corporation || Yes with comments || 2.0 Use Case and Requirements Workgroup Mission, Vision, and Objectives:
 * Robert Snelick || National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) ||  ||   ||
 * Roger Hornsby || Quest Diagnostics, Incorporated || Yes ||  ||
 * Scott Serich || IJIS Institute ||  ||   ||
 * Seonho Kim || ApeniMED (formerly known as MEDNET),
 * Srinath Remala || Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) ||  ||   ||
 * Terry Hearn || Wellpoint ||  ||   ||
 * Vassil Peytchev || Epic ||  ||   ||
 * Walter Henricks, MD || College of American Pathologists ||  ||   ||
 * Wayne King || Covisint ||  ||   ||
 * Wes Kennemore || Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) ||  ||   ||
 * William Ormerod || Siemens || Yes with comment || Reduce ambiguity of what "structured data" means . ||
 * Thanos Tsiolis || Epic || Yes with comments || In section 2.0 there is the following sentence:

Also in section 2.0, under theObjectives of the Use Case and Requirements, two bullets under #4 talk about**Time** and **Cost** Reduction to Create a New Lab Interface. In our experience the time and cost reduction in the implementation of laboratory interfaces depend a lot on the existence of an outgoing orders interface to the lab. When addressing and defining the field by field needs of the lab result reporting message we should also consider and address the case where an order has been sent to the lab previous to the result coming back to the order placer. ||

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="space.template.inc_contentleft_end"