If this group starts delving into the data of the various HIPAA transactions
I fear it will most certainly veer off track big time. This effort is/should
be substantially above the business data level and be dealing with message
addressing and various transport methods that may be supported/required by a
trading partner.

Furthermore, the scope of this effort should not be limited to the HIPAA
transactions, but serve all of health care.

Rachel Foerster
Principal
Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd.
Professionals in EDI & Electronic Commerce
39432 North Avenue
Beach Park, IL 60099
Phone: 847-872-8070
Fax: 847-872-6860
http://www.rfa-edi.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Mattias/Tal Systems [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 1:29 PM
To: 'WEDI/SNIP Listserve'
Subject: Re: CPP Data elements draft for comment



----- Original Message -----
From: Rachel Foerster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'WEDI/SNIP Listserve' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 11:02 AM
Subject: RE: CPP Data elements draft for comment

> Developing a requirements document....how novel!

Slightly off this topic..?

Do we need to have separate work teams for "registry data elements by
[business?] transaction?"

If so, I can help with 270/271 Eligibility Request/Response pair.

I know the '835 Health Care Remittance' pretty well: see
http://www.providerpaymentpartner.com for a product to process the 835; but
about the only thing Sally Provider would need to know about a payer's
remittance capability is, "ANSI Remittance Available Yes or No?".

(Unless, of course, Sally is going to set up Ole Doc Smith's office in the
registry to help all those payers route 835s to her..)

Michael Mattias
Tal Systems, Inc.
Racine WI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







Reply via email to