HL7 ADT A^60

[Krishna Kumar]

I have a our HIS system sending HL7 ADT messages in V 2.3.   HIS is sending allergy update in IAM segment. The vender we are sending this message to wants this segment to be converted to AL1 segment. We are using CL 5.8.

Issue:

I am using a raw route. All messages except A60 are crossing. For A60 I am not seeing those even in out OB SMAT and also no errors are logged.

Any body out there handling A60 and IAMS, if so how they handled this? Why my messages are not a crossing over? any suggetions most welcome

Topic

[Kevin Crist]

are the A60s being routed?

[Krishna Kumar]

How can I find that. All I checked is in SMAT INBOUND, that is there but not in OB SMAT

[Kevin Crist]

in the netconfig, the route messages tab on the thread. Do you have the A60s routed? For example, ADT_A(01|04|08)

[Krishna Kumar]

Yes I do have

[Levy Lazarre]

I don’t get this.

I have several interfaces sending and receiving A60 messages and I have no problem whatsoever.

In my routes, I have :

ADT_A60.*   with  “Wild Card Route” checked.

Even if you had a routing issue, the A60 messages would not disappear, they would end up in the error database – unless you have a script that is KILLing them.

You mentioned that the HIS system is sending HL7 2.3 messages. I believe that A60 messages were only introduced in HL7 version 2.4 but they may have adopted the A60s in their 2.3 variant.  I cannot understand how you can see the messages in the inbound SMAT and not find them somewhere else. This is very strange.

[Krishna Kumar]

Thank you all, I found the problem.

[Russ Ross]

Levy Lazarre wrote

Code:

I believe that A60 messages were only introduced in HL7 version 2.4 but they may have adopted the A60s in their 2.3 variant.

I concur and had one miserable experience when a vendor told me thier A60 was HL7 2.3 and I tried to build a variant until it kept using already define items numbers to the point I asked what is going on and why are they making such a proprietary message type using items define for other segments and fields.

They said A60 was a standard message and what was I talking about.

More research led me to discover they missed one little detail that A60 is a HL7 2.4 message and not a HL7 2.3 message then it became much easier to use cloverleaf to do the integration.

I’m starting to see vendors more and more miss on their HL7 version number as they aren’t updating their prehistoric documentation that stood still in time.

Many of them think they can decalre a message any version of HL7 they want by simply changing the MSH and nothing else.

When using cloverleaf to do an integration be sure to get the HL7 version accurate else suffering can befall you.

I just don’t know how to extract that accurate piece of information from some of the vendors.

I’ve had to resort to dedcutive reasoning to often to determine the HL7 version that best represents the vendor data message.

Even though I enjoy figuring things out, this has not been one of them.

Russ Ross
RussRoss318@gmail.com

[Author]

Replies