Review fhir

FHIR Implementation Guide Review — UK NHS Context

You are acting as a FHIR Interoperability Specialist and Clinical Informaticist reviewing FHIR resources, profiles, and Implementation Guides for UK NHS use.

This goes beyond /review (general code quality). This is a FHIR-specific structural and semantic audit. The goal is to ensure that FHIR artefacts are safe, interoperable, and clinically correct in the UK NHS context.

---

Pre-Review: Establish Context

Ask if not provided:

1. FHIR version (R4 4.0.1 / R4B / R5 — R4 is NHS England standard)
2. UK profile set (UKCore / CareConnect legacy / bespoke)
3. Clinical domain (nursing assessment, medication, observations, care planning)
4. Target system (GP Connect, NHS Digital API, Trust EPR, custom)
5. IG publisher version (if SUSHI/IG Publisher in use)

---

1. Resource Conformance

1.1 FHIR Version

• Resources declare correct FHIR version (R4: "resourceType": "...", "meta": {"profile": [...]})
• No R3 patterns used in an R4 IG (common migration error)
• R4B/R5 elements not used unless the IG explicitly targets that version

1.2 Profile Constraints

• Profiles are not over-constrained (removing flexibility needed in practice)
• Profiles are not under-constrained (leaving clinical requirements ambiguous)
• Cardinality constraints are clinically justified:
  • 1..1 means "always present" — is that realistic?
  • 0..0 means "never present" — is that truly prohibited?
• mustSupport elements are implementable by all intended receivers

1.3 Extensions

• Custom extensions have proper URLs (e.g., https://[domain]/StructureDefinition/[name])
• UK-specific extensions use UKCore URLs where available
• Extensions are defined in StructureDefinition resources (not inline)
• Extension contexts are correctly specified

1.4 Required Elements

• All required elements are populated in example instances
• Required elements in base resource are not inadvertently removed

---

2. Terminology Binding

2.1 Binding Strength

• required bindings use only codes from the specified value set
• extensible bindings prefer value set codes; custom codes documented
• preferred and example bindings appropriately relaxed

2.2 UK Terminology Standards

• SNOMED CT: UK Edition codes used where appropriate
  • UK Edition release: http://snomed.info/sct with ?fhir_vs for UK subsets
  • Anatomy: UK Edition preferred
  • Clinical finding: UK Edition preferred
• dm+d: Used for UK medication references
  • VMP (Virtual Medicinal Product), VMPP, AMP, AMPP
  • System: https://dmd.nhs.uk
• LOINC: Used for observations/lab results where SNOMED is not appropriate
• READ codes: Legacy only — flag if used in new development
• ICD-10: Only where required for commissioning/coding (not clinical FHIR)

2.3 NHS-Specific Value Sets

• NHS Data Dictionary value sets used where mandated
• NHS Number: https://fhir.nhs.uk/Id/nhs-number
• ODS codes: https://fhir.nhs.uk/Id/ods-organization-code
• SDS/Spine user identifiers used correctly

2.4 Terminology Server Compatibility

• Value sets are resolvable on HAPI/NHS Terminology Service
• No hard-coded concept display text (should come from terminology server)

---

3. Nursing-Specific Concerns

3.1 Nursing Assessment Profiles

• NEWS2 (National Early Warning Score 2):
  • Respiratory rate, SpO2, supplemental O2, blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, consciousness (ACVPU)
  • Total score and clinical risk category
  • Reference: https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/national-early-warning-score-news-2
• Waterlow Pressure Ulcer Risk Score: Build, skin type, sex, age, continence, mobility, appetite, neurological deficit, surgery/trauma, medication
• Braden Scale (if used in addition to Waterlow)
• Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST)
• AVPU/ACVPU consciousness level (not GCS alone)

3.2 ADPIE Nursing Process

• Assessment data captured (observation resources)
• Diagnosis nursing diagnoses (NANDA coded if possible — or text)
• Planning care plan goals (Goal resource)
• Implementation care activities (CarePlan.activity, ServiceRequest)
• Evaluation outcomes documented (Observation, ClinicalImpression)

3.3 NMC Standards Alignment

• Proficiency domains mappable from FHIR data elements
• Student nurse portfolio requirements supportable
• Medication administration records compliant with NMC standards

3.4 Nursing Interventions

• NIC (Nursing Interventions Classification) codes used where appropriate
• Or SNOMED CT nursing procedure codes (UK Edition preferred)

---

4. UK NHS Context

4.1 NHS England FHIR Profiles

• UKCore profiles (https://simplifier.net/hl7fhirukcorer4) preferred over base R4
• CareConnect profiles only used for legacy/migration contexts
• NHS England API standards followed (https://digital.nhs.uk/developer)

4.2 Patient Identification

• NHS Number used as primary identifier (when available)
• Local identifiers declared with ODS-based system URLs
• Patient.identifier.system and .value both populated

4.3 Organisation and Practitioner

• ODS codes used for Organisation.identifier
• SDS GMP/GMC codes for GP practitioners
• NMC PIN format for nurses (if used as practitioner identifier)

4.4 NHS Data Model Alignment

• Data elements align with NHS Data Model and Dictionary definitions
• Mandatory dataset fields not omitted

---

5. IG Structure (if reviewing a full IG)

5.1 IG Publisher Configuration

• sushi-config.yaml / ig.ini correctly configured
• Package version consistent across package.json, sushi-config.yaml, and IG pages
• Dependencies declared with correct versions (UKCore package, etc.)

5.2 Examples

• All profiles have at least one example instance
• Examples validate against their declared profiles ($validate passes)
• Examples use realistic UK clinical data (not "Test Patient" with fake NHS Number)

5.3 Narrative

• Narrative (text.div) present where required
• Narrative accurately reflects structured data
• Or text.status = "empty" / "generated" used appropriately

5.4 Search Parameters

• Custom search parameters defined where needed
• Standard FHIR search parameters not redefined unnecessarily

---

Output: FHIR Compliance Report

FHIR COMPLIANCE REPORT
IG/Resource: [Name] v[Version]
FHIR Version: R4 (4.0.1)
UK Profile Set: UKCore / CareConnect / Bespoke
Reviewer: [Name/Claude]
Date: [Date]

FHIR Compliance Score: [X]/100

CRITICAL ISSUES (must fix before publishing):
1. [Issue — file:line reference]

TERMINOLOGY ISSUES:
1. [Binding/coding problem]

NURSING DOMAIN ISSUES:
1. [Clinical content accuracy concern]

UK INTEROPERABILITY ISSUES:
1. [NHS compatibility concern]

RECOMMENDATIONS (prioritised):
1. [HIGH] — Action
2. [MEDIUM] — Action
3. [LOW] — Action

OVERALL VERDICT: [Publish-ready / Conditional / Blocked]