New Companion Guide, 5010 format – no ISA issue?

[Jim Kosloskey]

All,

UHC has issued their new Companion Guide and they have opted to embrace the 5010 rather than the 4010 format.

At first blush this seemed to present an issue  with the ISA. Now I  am not so sure.

In Cloverleaf 5.6 there is a 5040 definition that seems to account for the change in the ISA describe in the 5010 format.

However, the new field, the Simple Data Element Repetition Separator seems to imply some simple data elements can now be repeating.

I do not see a way to specify which data elements repeat in the X12 configurator and so I am unsure as to whether the Xlate will support the repetition through ITERATE.

I know HealthVision is taking a look at this and hopefully we will have more word soon.

In the meantime, as I get time to investigate further, I will report on my findings.

If any of you get any clarification, please share.

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

Topic

[Rob Abbott]

Jim and I spoke on the phone about this – we have no plans to support 5010 at this late date in 5.7.  

It takes a while to work a standard in.  I am also unsure whether 5010 has been officially approved or whether it’s still draft.  I’m not able to find a lot of information about it.

For now a 5040 variant will be required to support 5010.  Perhaps you folks that are required to integrate with UHC can work together on a variant.

Interesting question on the repetition separator.  I will do some investigation to determine whether this is supported in 5040.

Rob Abbott
Cloverleaf Emeritus

[Jim Kosloskey]

Washington Publishing has an Implementatin Guide for the 005010 278 Transaction Set.

Hopefully we will have one in our hands soon.

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

[Rob Abbott]

I checked on the support for 5040 in our parser.  

The good news – there is support for repeating fields in the parser.

The bad news – the repetition separator is hardcoded to 0x0 (the null byte) and cannot be changed.  

Until this is fixed (and I have submitted a bug-fix request, HUBad12096) the workaround is to convert the repetition separator to 0x0 on the way in, and 0x0 to your preferred separator on the way out.

I created a 5040 270 that has a COM segment with a repeating field.  I used null as a separator in my test data.  You can see that repetitions are parsed correctly:

1(0).1(0).0(0).COM(0).#1(0).[0].[0]  :  >QUAL< 1(0).1(0).0(0).COM(0).#2(0).[0].[0]  :  >1< 1(0).1(0).0(0).COM(0).#2(1).[0].[0]  :  >2< 1(0).1(0).0(0).COM(0).#2(2).[0].[0]  :  >3< 1(0).1(0).0(0).COM(0).#3(0).[0].[0]  :  >COMPONENT<

Rob Abbott
Cloverleaf Emeritus

[Jim Kosloskey]

Rob,

Thanks for the information.

It appears that UHC is not using any of the repeating Data Items.

Of course, I am not finished with the evaluation at this point so surprises may yet be found.

But it is good to know we can handle the situation should it arise.

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 29+ years Cloverleaf, 59 years IT - old fart.

[Author]

Replies