@ibacher / others, I had a very interesting conversation with @bolschok today and here are my minutes:
- Whilst we (at Mekom) are working out a LIMS integration using FHIR messages and openmrs-eip, we will try to evaluate the overhead to also process radiology orders.
The thinking is that it “should” be a very similar effort:- A Camel route to scan for radiology orders out of Debezium.
- Each time a radiology order is detected → fetch both the patient FHIR resource and the radiology service request.
- Create a bundle patient + service request.
- Propagate that bundle into a Camel RIS/PACS route.
- “Someone” to develop a MF radiology order UI in OpenMRS 3.0. That’s just so that there is a UX to place them.
@jdick, @ddesimone, do you guys need that in the short/medium term? - Alternatively, just use the radiology module for a POC if there is too much overhead with the previous point, and assuming the radiology module provides such UI, presumably within the legacy UI. Maybe @teleivo can speak to this?
- Clarify, btw, what it is that the radiology module brings in terms of backend data model changes that are necessary. Bahmni does not use the radiology module and seem to be able to model radiology orders anyway. There is a knowledge gap here that someone needs to expand on. Maybe @teleivo can speak to this too?
- Assuming we have an appropriate way to represent radiology orders in OpenMRS, can the FHIR2 module populate radiology service requests that are useable and complete enough for the RIS/PACS to do what it needs to do with them? I guess that’s a question for @ibacher.
Then… there will be the way back. The RIS/PACS will somehow convey FHIR image study resources back to OpenMRS. I guess we are not there yet but this will require some work as well. Alternatively, instead of image study resources, the RIS/PACS could simply send back observations. That would certainly make things a lot easier. From my conversation with @bolschok it seems that it was still unclear what the actual proper FHIR workflow should be, I’ll let @bolschok complement on this point.
@bolschok I hope this reflects what we spoke about, of course please add your points as well. Thanks again for your time earlier!