Addressing Meeting 2010-06-02

Notes from 'Addressing' & Directories Workgroup

Date: June 2, 2010
Time: 3:30pm-4:30pm
Attendees: Lin Wan, John Moehrke, Karen Witting, Eric Heflin, Hans Buitendijk, Thomas Davidson, Neeraj Saraf, Brett Peterson, Arien Malec, Jackie Key
Actions for this Week

#	Date	Action	Status	Owner	Due Date
4	6/2/10	Reach out to Rich Kernan to determine appropriate NHIN Exchange collaboration	Open	Jackie Key	6/4/10
5	6/2/10	Send an email to the full Implementation Group asking for volunteers to participate in the IHE profile review	Open	Arien	6/4/10
6	6/2/10	Create new wiki pages to hold comments for each of the IHE profile review subgroups: IHE Healthcare Provider Directory profile - Technical Review Subgroup IHE Healthcare Provider Directory profile - User Story Review Subgroup	Open	Arien	6/3/10
7	6/2/10	Review output of IHE profile review	Open	WG	6/16/10
8	6/2/10	Invite IHE team that worked on Healthcare Provider Directory profile to comment on subgroup evaluations	Open	Arien/Karen Witting	6/14/10

Actions from Last Week
n/a

Agenda

• Discuss IHE Healthcare Provider Directory profile, found here
• Next Steps

Notes
Comment from Arien Malec
· Proposed new charter for WG is to:
o Provide guidance as to how a NHIN Direct address should be incorporated into a provider directory
o Provide feedback on the IHE Healthcare Provider Directory profile

Feedback on Proposed Addressing & Directories WG Charter

Name	Feedback/Comment
Lin Wan	Agree with charter
John Moehrke	· Good work for us to do, but poor timing in terms of concrete implementation work · Arien Malec – IHE profile only has a one month comment period, which has begun
Karen Witting	Agree with charter
Eric Heflin	Agree with charter
Hans Buitendijk	Agree with charter
Thomas Davidson	· Will NHIN Exchange comment separately from NHIN Direct rather than having a unified NHIN response? · Arien Malec – Would be a good approach to have a unified comment. o However, the needs of the NHIN Direct project are different than those of NHIN Exchange. o Would be interested in hearing applicable use cases for NHIN Exchange, but suspect they’d be different from those for NHIN Direct · Jackie to reach out to Rich Kernan to determine appropriate NHIN Exchange collaboration · Karen Witting - NHIN Exchange is planning to discuss the IHE profile on June 15th · Could have joint discussion, but each group needs to ensure that separate needs of NHIN Direct and NHIN Exchange are addressed
Neeraj Saraf	Agree with charter
Brett Peterson	Agree with charter

Comment from Arien Malec
· Propose two activities for WG:
o Write user stories that illustrate the key clinical workflow needs, in the context of NHIN Direct, that call for provider directories
o In light of these user stories, conduct a detailed technical evaluation of IHE profile
· Do these activities make sense and are there additional tasks?

Feedback on Proposed WG Activities

Name	Feedback/Comment
Lin Wan	Agree
John Moehrke	· For activity #1, we should look at use cases that are already part of the IHE profile and define any additional NHIN Direct use cases that are not already addressed · Arien Malec – We should call out the core use cases in IHE profile that are most relevant to NHIN Direct
Karen Witting	· Agree with comments regarding use cases · Would like more detail on how the review would be done · Arien Malec – Will address at the end of this round by calling for volunteers to form subgroups and conduct review offline
Eric Heflin	Agree
Hans Buitendijk	Agree
Thomas Davidson	Agree
Neeraj Saraf	· It sounds like we’re going to come up with a requirements specification · Arien Malec – Yes, we’ll come up with requirements and make sure that the IHE profile addresses requirements
Brett Peterson	· We seem to be assuming that there will be NHIN Direct user stories that require directories · Arien Malec – If we can come up with reasonable NHIN Direct user stories that would make it highly useful to have a provider directory, then we should proceed with the technical review. Many state HIEs are interested in provider directories.

Comment from Arien Malec
· Propose that the WG convene two subgroups:
1. User story evaluation - First evaluate user stories already in IHE and see if there any gaps with NHIN, then define any additional user stories to address these gaps
2. Detailed review of IHE profile - Come back to WG with comments and recommendations
Comment from John Moehrke
· Public comment process for IHE calls for the following format: This is the issue I have and this is how I recommend the issue should be resolved
· Should we have the subgroups identify issues with IHE profile and come back to overall WG for agreement on a recommendation
· Arien Malec - Agree
o We’ll come back as a full WG to review issues/recommendations and come up with a list of suggestions for IHE in the specified IHE format
Comment from Hans Buitendijk
· Is the objective to inform state HIEs and IHE?
· Arien Malec - We are not giving definitive recommendations to the states. We are making sure that the IHE specification meets the needs of the NHIN Direct project so that we can point the state HIEs to this
· John Moehrke – We may need to give guidance on how to enter things specifically for NHIN Direct
· Arien Malec - Recommendations for standards should not come from NHIN Direct
Comment from Arien Malec
· Call for volunteers to participate in these teams
· Request that technology evaluation be conducted by WG members who did not participate in creating the IHE profile
· John Moehrke – Will Arien reach out to other NHIN Direct participants to take part in this review?
· Arien will send an email to the full Implementation Group asking for volunteers to participate in the IHE profile review

Feedback on Subgroup Volunteers

Name	Feedback/Comment
Lin Wan	Volunteer for technical subgroup
John Moehrke	Volunteer for technical subgroup
Karen Witting	Neither
Eric Heflin	Volunteer for user stories subgroup
Hans Buitendijk	Volunteer for user stories subgroup and know of another potential participant for technical subgroup
Thomas Davidson	Volunteer for both subgroups
Neeraj Saraf	Volunteer for technical subgroup
Brett Peterson	Neither

Comment from John Moehrke
· Would it make sense to look at the data schema rather than the transaction?
o Karen Witting – IHE profile isn’t laid out that way and this distinction might be confusing to most readers
Comment from Arien Malec
· Arien will create two wiki pages, one to hold comments for each group
· The WG won’t meet on the 9th
· Next WG meeting will be after the face-to-face meeting, when we’ll review the output of the IHE profile review
· We should invite participants from this WG to the NHIN Exchange meeting
Comment from Karen Witting
· Should IHE team that worked on the profile be invited to review the comments?
o Arien Malec - Yes, that would be a good idea
Comment from Hans Buitendijk
· What are the core use cases that Arien referred to?
o Arien Malec –Was referring to the motivating IHE use cases