CH EMED Medication Profile (MedicationStatement) (Michaela Ziegler, ahdis ag) about ch-emed HOT 5 CLOSED

• needs more inquries, also with CDA-requirements and for other eMed documents
• IPAG has only statements for prescription and dispense ("oa", differently interpreted in the specs)

from ch-emed.

Check with IHE PHARM MTP if optionality is really 1..1 and if yes, a NullFlavor would be possible. If yes we would leave FHIR Medication.amount 0..1 for MedicationStatment but with mustSupport.

If the capacityQuantity is given in countable units, the unit attribute SHALL NOT be present. If the capacityQuantity is given in >non-countable units, the unit attribute SHALL be present and the value SHALL be out of the UCUM code system.

from ch-emed.

I've discussed this with Stéphane and he thinks the <pharm:capacityQuantity> element cardinality should be revised to 0..1, and NullFlavor be disallowed.
The reasoning is that other elements are also optional, and it probably makes no sense to assume that the package capacity is always known, but not its name:

In case the package describes a product, and the package has a brand name, it SHOULD be
described in the pharm:name element (e.g., Xylocaine 1% with Adrenaline Inj, 5 injections
package).

(The case where the package doesn't describe a product is not covered by CDA-CH-EMED, as the <pharm:asSuperContent> element is disallowed).

The XML Schema also has an optional cardinality for this.

This would align CDA-CH-EMED with CH-EMED I guess.

from ch-emed.

Great, thank you Quentin for the explanations. Therefore, we can close this issue now or set it to "ready for review" according to the rules, respectively. @oliveregger and @ziegm you can close it if you agree
-> FHIR specification cardinality remains unchanged
-> CDA specs wil be revised (Ticket 35)

from ch-emed.

I agree, thanks.

from ch-emed.