what if an 'old' PIX Manager just wants to provide RESTful query access its cross-referenced patients?

[lynnfel]

In the new PIXm, the PIX Manager is required to support ITI-104 feed. Unless I am misunderstanding this transaction (very possible), the PIX Manager performing 104 must be maintaining patient records as FHIR Patient Resources.

If I have a legacy PIX or PIXv3 Manager who just wants to be able to respond to ITI-83 queries (based on cross-referenced IDs in my database), I cannot support PIXm as a PIX Manager (because I don't store FHIR Patient Resources).

Am I missing something??

[oliveregger]

In the new PIXm, the PIX Manager is required to support ITI-104 feed. Unless I am misunderstanding this transaction (very possible), the PIX Manager performing 104 must be maintaining patient records as FHIR Patient Resources.

Where do you read this requirement that it must maintain patient records as FHIR Resources? I hoped we had written the text that it would allow to group the actors to proxy it to v2/v3 (see http://build.fhir.org/ig/IHE/ITI.PIXm/branches/master/volume-1.html#1416-pixm-cross-profile-considerations).

If I have a legacy PIX or PIXv3 Manager who just wants to be able to respond to ITI-83 queries (based on cross-referenced IDs in my database), I cannot support PIXm as a PIX Manager (because I don't store FHIR Patient Resources).

Am I missing something??

No, but not because of storing the FHIR Patient Resource, but because the optionality is set to Required for
Patient Identifier Cross-reference Manager / Mobile Patient Identifier Cross-reference Query [ITI-83] in Volume 1

[oliveregger]

@lynnfel can i close this issue or does it need further discussion?

[lynnfel]

Yes, I will close it.