Unfortunately there are a lot of "institutions" where business is conducted that appear likely to not require (and wont' have) NPIs. But the NPI is certainly ONE of the Coding Systems that should be included.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Forrey Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 12:34 PM To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Station Numbers for institutions in VOE I suggest that consideration be given to the "National Provider Identifier" by CMS. This identifier applies to each organizational unit ("Institution"?) as well as to each individual practitioner and is already scheduled for implementation under HIPAA. Consultation should be made with the VA as to how they may be handling this and develop a compatible strategy for healthcare in general with CMS (the non-VOE part that may not be talking with the VOE part). This can be coordinated with ONCHIT and the American Health Information Community - AHIC advisory organization to the new ANSI Health Information Technology Standards Panel - HITSP, both being organized by ONCHIT. Cameron may be able to help guide such steps. On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Frederick D. S. Marshall wrote: > Dear Cameron, > > We should talk about this. My initial impulse has been the same as Dr. Z's, > to come up with a generalized system we can use beyond the VA. > > Yours truly, > Rick > > Cameron Schlehuber wrote: > >> The STATION NUMBER field should be kept as is for VA and be null for non-VA >> sites. There is an IDENTIFIER sub-file field 9999 that uses a CODING >> SYSTEM >> (the entries to select from are established in collaboration with the VA >> HL7 >> administrator) and an ID unique to that Coding System. What we need to do >> with VistA for VOE, OpenVistA, etc, is to identify the places in code where >> Institution identification should be based on that Code System-ID pair. I >> know the Lab Service package has already had to embark on that effort since >> lots of institutions with sharing agreements with VA do not have VA Station >> Numbers. >> >> Cameron Schlehuber >> >> --------------------- >> JohnLeo Zimmer wrote: >> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 5:51 AM >> >> Wouldn't it be more appropriate to provide a standard for station >> numbers that can be generalized beyond the VA?. I had hoped that world >> vista's open forum might serve that function. >> >> Maybe the station number needs to be modified (with a alpha prefix >> perhaps) to identify the side as VA vs Private Sector vs testbed, etc. >> >> Robert DeWayne wrote: >> >>> Station numbers are a VA issue, we did not have time to eliminate this >>> code for VOE. This is a known issue. Why do you need a station number >>> for VOE? >>> >>> Robert DeWayne >>> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, > and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl > _______________________________________________ > Hardhats-members mailing list > Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
