-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Condition] Morphology of wounds / (open) fractures / ... VS morphology of tumors #37
Comments
EDIT: bodyStructure is not an element in R4, but bodySite is, so we could argue using a bodyStructure extension to put morphology in it EDIT2: in context of the datacapabilities project (KWS data to FHIR) this is an urgent question |
I'll bring this topic back to life cuz we need an answer and there is a WG tomorrow ;)
|
this will be discussed in the business work group and referred back to WG through @bdc-ehealth |
Morphology is defined as an element of bodyStructure (see https://build.fhir.org/bodystructure.html) but, I assume, we don't want to put diagnosis in the bodyStructure element. Therefore we came across some questions:
**Case burn injury: ** seems valid to describe the wound in the bodyStructure and thus add morphology
Case tumor: ??? depends on the case - procedure / observation / ... also related to Question about logical model for oncologie: #38
Case open or closed fracture: maybe using an extension? Or putting it in the bodyStructure?
The US made an extension: https://build.fhir.org/ig/HL7/fhir-mCODE-ig/StructureDefinition-mcode-histology-morphology-behavior.html that, I think, is only used in their oncology model.
My suggestion would be the following:
Something like that? Are there other/better suggestions?
FYI related topics:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: