Architectural choices: One composition archetype per document type, or not?
jussara.macedo at gmail.com
Thu Feb 11 12:13:32 EST 2016
we had the same doubt here when designing a national EHR for a health
plan, because openEHR model is data driven and not document driven.
Therefore we decided to use only one generic "encounter" composition as
and a generic "ad hoc" section to navigation purposes and a single health
summary template. All terminology were put outside the archetypes, so we
can reuse them more easily.
In the national EHR project, which is still doc driven, due to many
different local terminologies used in the same "field" by the business
owners of each business case and the lack of a terminology server, we had
to specialize a lot of archetypes, and to handle that we created different
docs (diff templates).
OpenEHR Foundation- Director
2016-02-11 12:17 GMT-02:00 Bakke, Silje Ljosland <
silje.ljosland.bakke at nasjonalikt.no>:
> When implementing an openEHR based system for a large hospital, there will
> be hundreds if not thousands of document types. Examples of these are
> admission notes for different departments and specialties, outpatient
> notes, nursing documentation, check lists, discharge summaries, etc ad
> infinitum. Each of these could either have its own COMPOSITION archetype,
> or they could reuse generic compositions but have a separate template for
> each document type.
> What’s the smart architectural choice to make here; 1-1 document type –
> COMPOSITION, or reuse of generic COMPOSITIONs in specific templates? Why?
> How can you query a specific document type if it doesn’t have its own
> Kind regards,
> *Silje Ljosland Bakke*
> Information Architect, RN
> Coordinator, National Editorial Board for Archetypes
> National ICT Norway
> Tel. +47 40203298
> Web: http://arketyper.no / Twitter: @arketyper_no
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical