HL7 Norge
FHIR Implementation Guide for the Norwegian Municipal Sector
Shared starting point for understanding and consistent use of FHIR in municipal health and care services.
Norwegian

FHIR Implementation Guide for the Norwegian Municipal Sector
0.3.0 - Norway flag

FHIR Implementation Guide for the Norwegian Municipal Sector - Local Development build (v0.3.0) built by the FHIR (HL7® FHIR® Standard) Build Tools. See the Directory of published versions

Conformance and Scope

This page defines how binding and guidance content should be interpreted across the IG.

What This Page Controls

The Conformance page controls:

  • how requirement words are interpreted
  • which parts of the IG are normative
  • what is in and out of scope in this version

Normative Requirement Words

This IG uses these normative keywords:

  • SHALL: mandatory requirement
  • SHOULD: strong recommendation
  • MAY: optional

If a statement is not expressed with SHALL, SHOULD or MAY, it is guidance.

Priority In Case Of Doubt Or Conflict

When the same topic is described in multiple places, interpretation follows this order:

  1. Requirements expressed in profiles and other machine-readable artifacts (StructureDefinition, bindings, cardinality).
  2. Statements using SHALL, SHOULD or MAY in normative sections.
  3. Guidance text, examples and use case descriptions.

Interpretation of terminology bindings

The service value set has example binding strength: it demonstrates possible codes without restricting code choice. Binding and cardinality are separate requirements. ServiceRequest.code must be populated, but its code need not come from the example value set. A preferred binding recommends the specified value set. See FHIR binding strengths.

Interpretation Of MustSupport

This version of the IG does not use MustSupport in the municipal profiles.

  • Important minimum requirements are expressed through cardinality and references.
  • Use of MustSupport can be considered later when the profiles have been tested and anchored more broadly.

Scope And Boundaries In This Version

European And National Profile Layers

  • No-basis SHALL be the national starting point for profiling where a relevant base profile exists. The four municipal profiles inherit directly from FHIR R4; recommended use of no-basis for referenced resources and the machine-validation boundary are described in Norwegian Context.
  • This IG SHOULD be assessed against HL7 Europe Base/Core before release or consultation when profile scope, shared actors, documents or EHDS-related content changes.
  • HL7 Europe Base/Core is used as an external reference and source of modelling inspiration in this version, not as a package dependency or machine-enforced conformance layer.
  • If no-basis and HL7 Europe Base/Core differ, the difference SHOULD be documented and handled through HL7 Norway governance before this IG introduces local divergence.

Included

  • Municipal patterns for ServiceRequest, Encounter, EpisodeOfCare and CarePlan.
  • Profiling based on no-basis where relevant profiles exist.
  • Practical use through use cases, mapping and example chains.
  • High-level API principles for search, versioning and documentation.

Not Included

  • A complete national profile catalog for all municipal domains.
  • New national code systems.
  • A full testing regime with formal certification.
  • A complete transport and security architecture.
  • Alternative profiles, APIs or endpoints for measurement data already handled by Welfare Technology Hub (Velferdsteknologisk knutepunkt, VKP) or Patient's measurement data (Pasientens måledata, PMD).

Normative Boundaries

  • New profiles and changes SHOULD start from documented needs and use cases.
  • The work SHALL consider reuse of existing profiles, especially no-basis, before new variants are introduced.
  • Deviations and new profiles SHOULD document consequences for interoperability and backwards compatibility.
  • Changes SHOULD be anchored in an HL7 Norway process with open dialogue and consultation.

Maturity and production use

Version 0.3.0 and the four profiles have draft status. They provide a concrete basis for review and implementation within the stated scope. Technical validation of profiles and synthetic examples does not by itself demonstrate working production interoperability.

Before production use, the parties need to agree and test:

  • code system identities, validity, versions and any local mappings
  • available resources, searches, references, corrections and history in the actual systems
  • access control, logging, error handling and responsibility for maintenance

Use the KPR functional assessment journey as a starting point for a test between two systems. The example does not validate national scoring rules. A 1.0.0 release requires agreed scope, review and acceptance; see version status.

Page Classification In This IG

Page Primary role
Conformance Normative interpretation frame and scope
Home Purpose, audience, scope and practical starting point
Modelling and profiling Modelling rules, profile choices and implementation guidance
Norwegian Context National baseline and guidance on KPR KTT code systems
API API requirements and documentation expectations
Use cases Scenarios and guidance
Mapping Conceptual mapping, with methodological requirements

What This Page Does Not Do

  • This page does not define all details of each profile.
  • This page does not replace profiles or CapabilityStatement.

For those details, see Modelling and profiling and API.

Abbreviations Used In This IG (Guidance)

The main text explains abbreviations in context where this is important. This short list is included as a reading aid for abbreviations that occur across several pages.

Abbreviation Meaning
EHDS European Health Data Space
EHR / EPJ Electronic health record / Norwegian electronic patient record (elektronisk pasientjournal)
HER-id Identifier from the Norwegian health unit register (Helseenhetsregisteret)
ICF International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health
IPLOS Former register and name used for individual-based nursing and care statistics; current reporting is through KPR KTT
KPR Norwegian municipal patient and user registry (Kommunalt pasient- og brukerregister)
KS The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities (Kommunesektorens organisasjon)
NAV Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration (Arbeids- og velferdsforvaltningen)
NEWS2 National Early Warning Score 2
NHN Norwegian Health Network (Norsk helsenett)
PLO Norwegian care and coordination messages (pleie- og omsorgsmeldinger)
PMD Patient's measurement data (Pasientens måledata)
VKP Welfare Technology Hub (Velferdsteknologisk knutepunkt)

References