Radiotherapy Resource

[davisart]

1) We need "Not known" for "Code" http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-eu/pcsp/ValueSet-vs-radiotherapyType-eu-pcsp.html 2) We don't understand if "Code" in Radiotherapy Boost (http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-eu/pcsp/StructureDefinition-Procedure-radiotheraphyBoost-eu-pcsp.html) can have more than one type of radiotherapy (i.e. Boost radiation therapy and External beam radiotherapy). Because 'Boost Radiation Therapy' is a fixed value, we also need to add a 'Radiotherapy Type' field with the following possible values of 'External beam radiotherapy', 'Brachytherapy', or 'unknown'."

[gcangioli]

1. We need "Not known" for "Code" http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-eu/pcsp/ValueSet-vs-radiotherapyType-eu-pcsp.html

Added

[gcangioli]

2. We don't understand if "Code" in Radiotherapy Boost (http://build.fhir.org/ig/hl7-eu/pcsp/StructureDefinition-Procedure-radiotheraphyBoost-eu-pcsp.html) can have more than one type of radiotherapy (i.e. Boost radiation therapy and External beam radiotherapy). Because 'Boost Radiation Therapy' is a fixed value, we also need to add a 'Radiotherapy Type' field with the following possible values of 'External beam radiotherapy', 'Brachytherapy', or 'unknown'."

My understanding is that the boost is always of the same type of the parent radiotherapy. If this assumption is correct the type is obtained from the parent radiotheraphy (i.e. Procedure.partOf.resolve().code).

In this case make more clear the mapping.

@davisart please confirm

[gcangioli]

https://github.com/hl7-eu/pcsp/commit/a936f8385ef4618bd7baa64704428c93da54221f

[davisart]

1. ok, thank you!
2. no, for external beam, boost can be: external beam, brachytherapy, NK. For brachytherapy and metabolic radionuclide, boost is missing

[gcangioli]

In this case:

• an option could be that of using in one code.coding "Boost radiation therapy" and in a second one the kind of "boost therapy"
• or use the code for the type of radiotherapy and the category to convey both "Radiotherapy" and "Boost radiation therapy" .

obviously none of them are back compatible changes

[davisart]

for us both solutions are feasible, we prefer the second one, please let us know, thank you!

[gcangioli]

Ok let's go for the second then...

[gcangioli]

https://github.com/hl7-eu/pcsp/commit/d888035fd84d5d30bf587f0f22a0de748fc6a956