Review dosage text and instruction fields to align with what was agreed with implementers

[dvribeira]

No description provided.

[dvribeira]

Add a new guidance page for this specific content or address this in CH EMED's guidance page about dosage.

[dvribeira]

After discussion in CH EMED meeting (w/ M. Ziegler, Q. Ligier, P. Jolo and myself):

• Up to us with text as full narrative. Probably not a good idea to enforce it with cardinality, we could leave cardinality as 0..1 and then add a warning constraint (this idea was not part of the discussion but what I could do to drive implementers to fill the text field).
• patientInstruction MUST be filled with any dosage information that cannot be provided in an structured manner within the dosage fields
• additionalInstruction MAY be used at the implementer's discretion to add dosage information that cannot be provided in an structured manner within the dosage fields but that they can code within additionalInstruction. Any information added to additionalInstruction must be present in patientInstruction.

To be discussed during PMP specs meeting 27 March 2024

[dvribeira]

After discussion with implementers and CH EMED, this is what will be done:

1. Systems shall fill patientInstruction with all the dosage data that cannot be filled in a structured manner (other than additionalInstruction).
2. Systems can optionally (as a nice to have) fill additionalInstruction with any dosage data that could not be filled in a structured manner in the other dosage fields.
3. text should contain the full narrative for all the dosage elements information (including the split dose information). This will be a strong recommendation, the cardinality will stay 0..1 but there will be a validation warning should the field be empty.