1. www.ihe.net PCD Point-of-Care Identity Mgmt. (PCIM) Discussion Notes Updated: 2012.04.06 Friday

2. www.ihe.net 2 PCIM @ Pump Summit Discussion Discussion: Reviewed current development of PCIM profile (see attach.) Discussed pump needs / requirements See next slide for 2nd graphic…

3. www.ihe.net 3 PCIM @ Pump Summit Discussion

4. www.ihe.net 4 PCIM Actor Combinations Simple “Phase 1” Option: Single point-to-point transaction Possible ACK/NAK or message confirmation? Add “supplier” & Demographics: Reporter grouped w/ Patient Demographics Consumer to define patient authentication capabilities using PAM/PDQ P-D Assoc. Suppler actor provides distribution / query capabilities

5. www.ihe.net 5 PCIM Actor Combinations Grouping with P-D Association Supplier: Tradeoffs? Device Identity Manager Actor: Should the profile define an optional actor that can manage multiple device identifiers? This would be analogous to what is defined to manage multiple patient identifiers

6. www.ihe.net 6 PCIM Actor Combinations “Kitchen Sink” Option: Actors can be implemented in isolation or in combination (including the PDAS vs. grouped with PDC) PDAR could be part of a fused system or in a separate system PCIM-1: both to PDAS and PDAC (previous slide)?

7. www.ihe.net 7 PCIM System Examples

8. www.ihe.net PCD Rules!

9. www.ihe.net 9 Additional Slides

10. www.ihe.net 10 IHE TF Examples: RAD XDS-I.b Basic XDS Actors Grouped XDS + Imaging Actor New XDS-I Actor IHE XDS-I.b PCC-PW (rev 1.2, 2011-02-18) Figure 18.1-1 Cross-Enterprise Document Sharing for Imaging Diagram

11. www.ihe.net 11 IHE PCD TF Components Note: 1 st pass model – this may be broken into layers as more detail is added.

12. www.ihe.net 12 PCD Technical Framework++? Consider… Specialized applications will focus on binding to existing general / foundational transactions PIV left independent for historical purposes but will also be an option for DS-IP; should it remain standalone? DS-IP content modules will include LVP, syringe and possibly PCA IPEC => EC, with DS-IP[- xyz] including an EC binding to PCD-10 + DS-IP[-xyz] (events) content module.

13. www.ihe.net 13 DS-IP: Tech Framework Approach Notes: Agent / Manager … ? OR … Specialize IP Actors per pump type Profile dependencies are for required functionality For dependent profiles, Initiating & Receiving Actors are “grouped” with IP Agent or Manager Actors Event Communication (EC) an option or dependency? OIDs (MSH-21) indicate content bindings + options Content binding => New Transactions? “PnP Connect” Option w/ DPI profile binding? How would that affect the Dependencies? Do they have DPI option? This is still a tortured diagram … !

14. www.ihe.net 14 DS-IP: Actors – Grouped & Fused Notes: Alternative to having single DS-IP-LVP Agent & Manager actors is to have a combination of grouped actors + a fused actor that combines all the functionality. Grouped actors represent the binding between the profile transactions and the appropriate content model This would allow for testing, for example, of the LVP specific alarm transactions separately from the DEC or EC transactions.

15. www.ihe.net 15 IEEE 11073 Stds. vs. IHE Elements Slide-in-progress! (See previous slide…) … Note: Feedback to stds different colored flows?

16. www.ihe.net 16 IHE TF Examples: XDS-MS

17. www.ihe.net 17 IHE TF Examples: CIRC Cardiac Imaging Report Content (CIRC) – TI @ 2011.07.01 …

18. www.ihe.net 18 IHE TF Examples: PAM Actor grouping required so that ITI-31 can combine both identity & demographic information.