HL7 Terminology (THO)
5.1.0 - Publication
This page is part of the HL7 Terminology (v5.1.0: Release) based on FHIR R4. The current version which supercedes this version is 5.2.0. For a full list of available versions, see the Directory of published versions
Official URL: http://terminology.hl7.org/ValueSet/v3-ActMoodDesire | Version: 2.0.0 | |||
Active as of 2014-03-26 | Computable Name: ActMoodDesire | |||
Other Identifiers: id: urn:oid:2.16.840.1.113883.1.11.20382 |
No description
References
This value set is not used here; it may be used elsewhere (e.g. specifications and/or implementations that use this content)
http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood
where concept is-a _ActMoodDesire
This value set contains 6 concepts
Expansion based on ActMood v2.1.0 (CodeSystem)
Level | Code | System | Display | Definition |
1 | _ActMoodDesire | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | desire | Definition: A desire to have an act occur. |
2 | _ActMoodActRequest | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | act request | Definition: A request (or order) for an act that is part of a defined request/fulfillment cycle. UsageNotes: Use of an HL7 defined request/fulfillment framework is not required to use this mood code. |
3 | ARQ | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | appointment request | Definition: A request act that is specialized for the appointment scheduling request/fulfillment cycle. An appointment request is fulfilled only and completely by an appointment (APT), i.e., all that the appointment request intends is to create an appointment (the actual act may well not happen if that is the professional decision during the appointment). |
3 | PERMRQ | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | permission request | Definition: A request for a permission to perform the act. Typically a payer (or possibly a supervisor) is being requested to give permission to perform the act. As opposed to the RQO, the requestee is not asked to perform or cause to perform the act but only to give the permission. |
3 | RQO | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | request | Definition: A request act that is specialized for an event request/fulfillment cycle. UsageNotes: The fulfillment cycle may involve intermediary fulfilling acts in moods such as PRMS, APT, or even another RQO before being fulfilled by the final event. UsageNotes: The concepts of a "request" and an "order" are viewed as different, because there is an implication of a mandate associated with order. In practice, however, this distinction has no general functional value in the inter-operation of health care computing. "Orders" are commonly refused for a variety of clinical and business reasons, and the notion of a "request" obligates the recipient (the fulfiller) to respond to the sender (the author). Indeed, in many regions, including Australia and Europe, the common term used is "request." Thus, the concept embodies both notions, as there is no useful distinction to be made. If a mandate is to be associated with a request, this will be embodied in the "local" business rules applied to the transactions. Should HL7 desire to provide a distinction between these in the future, the individual concepts could be added as specializations of this concept. The critical distinction here, is the difference between this concept and an "intent", of which it is a specialization. An intent involves decisions by a single party, the author. A request, however, involves decisions by two parties, the author and the fulfiller, with an obligation on the part of the fulfiller to respond to the request indicating that the fulfiller will indeed fulfill the request. |
3 | ORD | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | request | Definition: A request act that is specialized for an event request/fulfillment cycle. UsageNotes: The fulfillment cycle may involve intermediary fulfilling acts in moods such as PRMS, APT, or even another RQO before being fulfilled by the final event. UsageNotes: The concepts of a "request" and an "order" are viewed as different, because there is an implication of a mandate associated with order. In practice, however, this distinction has no general functional value in the inter-operation of health care computing. "Orders" are commonly refused for a variety of clinical and business reasons, and the notion of a "request" obligates the recipient (the fulfiller) to respond to the sender (the author). Indeed, in many regions, including Australia and Europe, the common term used is "request." Thus, the concept embodies both notions, as there is no useful distinction to be made. If a mandate is to be associated with a request, this will be embodied in the "local" business rules applied to the transactions. Should HL7 desire to provide a distinction between these in the future, the individual concepts could be added as specializations of this concept. The critical distinction here, is the difference between this concept and an "intent", of which it is a specialization. An intent involves decisions by a single party, the author. A request, however, involves decisions by two parties, the author and the fulfiller, with an obligation on the part of the fulfiller to respond to the request indicating that the fulfiller will indeed fulfill the request. |
2 | PRP | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | proposal | Definition: A suggestion that an act might be performed. Not an explicit request, and professional responsibility may or may not be present. |
3 | RMD | http://terminology.hl7.org/CodeSystem/v3-ActMood | recommendation | Definition: A suggestion that an act should be performed with an acceptance of some degree of professional responsibility for the resulting act. Not an explicit request. . UsageNotes: Where there is no clear definition or applicable concept of "professional responsibility�, RMD becomes indistinguishable from PRP. . |
Explanation of the columns that may appear on this page:
Level | A few code lists that FHIR defines are hierarchical - each code is assigned a level. In this scheme, some codes are under other codes, and imply that the code they are under also applies |
System | The source of the definition of the code (when the value set draws in codes defined elsewhere) |
Code | The code (used as the code in the resource instance) |
Display | The display (used in the display element of a Coding). If there is no display, implementers should not simply display the code, but map the concept into their application |
Definition | An explanation of the meaning of the concept |
Comments | Additional notes about how to use the code |
History
Date | Action | Author | Custodian | Comment |
2022-10-18 | revise | Marc Duteau | TSMG | Fixing missing metadata; up-349 |
2020-05-06 | revise | Ted Klein | Vocabulary WG | Migrated to the UTG maintenance environment and publishing tooling. |
2014-03-26 | revise | Vocabulary (Woody Beeler) (no record of original request) | 2014T1_2014-03-26_001283 (RIM release ID) | Lock all vaue sets untouched since 2014-03-26 to trackingId 2014T1_2014_03_26 |