The HL7 Comprehensive Database: Corrections to Version 10

Home -> HL7 -> Comprehensive Database -> Corrections to Version 10 (HL7_96)

Suggested Corrections to the Database (V.10.0) and the Standard itself as technical corrections

I am still working on getting the next release of the database (hl7_96) out.
Unfortunately, when preparing for the next big release of v2 as v2+ we have identified a lot of errors that go back to previous releases. With this page we would like to summarize those because they will be applied to the database.

The proposed and applied changes follow the guidelines, which are currently under development in the HL7 V2 Management Group and documented in


v2.7.1 + v2.8: minx/max length

Erroneously, for v2.7.1 and v2.8 some data elements listed minimum and maximum values of 0.


General Acknowledgement

For 99% percent of the messages, the general Acknowlegement is defined as:

[{ SFT }]
[  UAC  ]
[{ ERR }]

Unfortunately, in chapter 10 the SIU_S12 message acknowledgement uses a repeating UAC segment. That needs to be adjusted.
Ironeously, the SIU message itself does not use SFT and UAC, which should be discussed for future versions.

As an open issue, UAC contains security information which may require multiple occurrences which then would lead to repeat the UAC segment. Therefore, all occurences of UAC must be defined as optional repeating. But that in return would require an overall change.

In chapter 10 the response message to SRM^S01-S11^SRM_S01 should be ACK^S01-S11^SRR_S01, and not ACK^S10-S11^SRR_S01.

For the events Q16, Q17, J01, J02 (in chapter 5) make ERR repeating.


Table 0125 and 0440

Table 0440 and 0125 are listing the different data types which can be used within the standard itself. The following tables list those valulse which are not used. Because we cannot delete them, they are marked as deprecated.

Table 0440

This table represents the overall codesystem.


Table 0125

This table is a value set to be used within OBX-2. Because the underlying data types are not used anymore, those should also be withdrawn from use in OBX result reporting.


Message Structure Mismatches

Comparing different message structures across versions revealed a set of issues. They are listed below including their solution.

ADT_A09: as of v2.7

In v2.7 the DG1 segment was dropped for reasons being documented in the standard. However, for compatiblity reasons, such a segment must be maintained and marked as withdrawn instead. Therefore, this segment is edited in again and marked as such. In v2.9 the optional OBX segment has been enhanced to a group, but that does not affect the addition of DG1 at the end.

A12: as of v2.4

In v2.4 A12 uses ADT_A09 with DG1 as optional repeating. As of v2.5, for A12 a new message structure ADT_A12 has been introduced with DG1 being only optional. In principle, this breaks backwards compatibility from v2.4 to v2.5. However, in v2.7 in ADT_A12 has been removed according to proposal 515. To fix at least that, DG1 will be added in again as of v2.7.

A43 + A44: as of v2.6

In v2.6 ARV segment has been added to ADT_A43 within A44, but not in A43 which also makes use of ADT_A43.
In v2.7 A44 uses ADT_A44.

K22: in v2.6

With v2.7 K22 uses RSP_K22. In v2.6 RSP_K21 of K22 is different from RSP_K21 with K21. So, the easiest solution is to introduce RSP_K22 accordingly.


Fixing O41-43 and O51-58

OO has identified some problems with the use of events O41, O42 and O43. It requires technical corrections according to the following table:

2.7.1 2.8 2.8.1 2.8.2 2.9
Original Correct Original Correct Original Correct Original Correct Original Correct
OSU - - O41 O51 O41 O51 O41 O51 O51 -
OSU ACK - - - - - - - O52 O52 -
OMQ - - O42 O57 O42 O57 O42 O57 O57 -
ORX - - O43 O58 O43 O58 O43 O58 O58 -
DBC - - O41 O41 O41 O41
DBU - - O42 O42 O42 O42
DRG O43 O43 O43 O43

The basic principle is, that not only the message are corrected, but the message structure identifiers as well.


Last Update : Sept. 23, 2020