hi, while testing my xlate configuration to convert ADT 2.4 messages to 2.1, I’ve encountered an interesting error
in the testing tool (in
MESSAGE 1
[0:TEST] [mid:0xeb67d0] The # 14 segment encountered ‘IN2’ is out of order for message type ‘ADT_A04’. Segment ignored.
Creator
Topic
-
-
John,
This indicates that the A04 message you are dealing with has the segments in a different order than what is defined in your variant for the ADT_A04 message; hence the message(s) you are seeing in the testing tool output.
-
John,
I concur with Jim-your variant doesn’t match your data. A technique that I like is to use the testing tool. Set your variant and run your data against it. I do this routinely before testing xlates to ensure that the variants are correct.
Phil
-
so you suggest I test the variant? What error should I get if the segments are off? I ran the test, first testing the 2.4 variant with a 2.4 message from the source system, tested the 2.4 to 2.1 exlate, then tested the 2.1 variant using the rusult message of the conversion xlate. I didn’t get any errors from either variant, but I still get the mismatched IR tags message from the xlate…
-
Did you change your variant at all after you built the xlate? I ask because you can also get the error if the “footprint” of a field in the variant doesn’t match what the “footprint” that was originally built in the xlate.
For instance, say you built the xlate and the xlateInVals for a field had a value of 0(0).OBX(0).00571. Then you changed the variant and the footprint inside the variant changed to 1(0).OBX(0).00571. If you don’t go back into the xlate and change the field to match the variant, when you run the message through the tester, it will give you that “mismatch IR tag” message.
I would double check my fields in my xlate to make sure they match what is in the variant…especially if you made changes to the variant after the xlate was built.
Hope this helps…
Tom Rioux
-
is it possible the Mismatched IR tag is a result of version field numbers being different? For instance, in version 2.4, PID field 3 = 0(0).PID.00106(0).[0], in version 2.1, PID field 3 = 0(0).PID.00034. I’m sure there are various differences in field numbering throughout. All the data appears correct as I convert the message, so I’m really wondering if this message is something I should be concerned with, where maybe it’s a concequence of the different versions?
-
The # 14 segment encountered ‘IN2’ is out of order for message type ‘ADT_A04’.
-
I’m actually not concerned about the IN1 segment ignored error. The version of 2.1 I’m converting to won’t include that IN1 segment and it needs to be dropped. I’m concerned about the
That’s why I’m curious about this. All the segments are in order according to my variant and the data I need to see in 2.1 is where it should be. Would this be because the source message (2.4) contains many, many segments that are being dropped by the 2.1 variant? Such as IN1 in betwen PV1 and NK1, ROL all over the place, and OBX, DRG, etc? I didn’t add these extra segs to the variant because the original 2.1 won’t use them and they shouldn’t be there anyway. The 2.1 variant is set up exactly the way Meditech sends 2.1 data…as is the 2.4…
Thanks for your input!
-
What it means in the simplest way is that in your translation you have a path / Reference to a field that is not correct as defined in your hl7 variant. So you have two fields that are not being copied over.
-
Thanks for the explanation, sometimes the simplest thoughts lead to the obvious solutions.
From what you said, I traced back to when I first started seeing this, which is when I added some custom Z segments. I believe I had the variant conflicting with the COPY operation I had set up in the xlate configuration. I verified the Z segments (which repeat) were accurately set up in both 2.1 and 2.4 variants (which didn’t seem to work when I originally set this up) and then removed the operation to copy the z segmetns from one version to the other (which I set up because the variants didn’t seem to be handling the Z segments).
The tag message didn’t appear this time and the Z segmetns are where they should be. Thanks for the help everyone!
- The forum ‘Cloverleaf’ is closed to new topics and replies.
.
