QDM contains attributes of radiation dose and radiation duration in Diagnostic Study, Performed, Diagnostic Study, Recommended, Diagnostic Study, Order, Procedure Performed, Procedure, Order, and Procedure Recommended.

In modeling HL7 concepts in QI Core, these attributes made it into the model. The Imaging Workgroup has requested reconsideration in HL7 and, after looking at the modeling, I think QDM needs some reconsideration as well. The attributes came from an attempt to model radiation dosage and duration in a EP measure when in 2012. At that time the concepts of radiation dose and duration were modeled as attributes. Following is a list of concerns:
(1) The dose and duration are not parts of a recommended or ordered study; it is only something measured when an imaging study is performed. Therefore, if the attributes remain, they should probably be retained only for Diagnostic Study, Performed and Procedure, Performed.
(2) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) profiled “Radiation Exposure Monitoring” in 2015 -
Reference: http://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Radiation_Exposure_Monitoring. The profile includes a report to a national registry. It seems the information desired might be better expressed as components of a report to the registry (a structured form), thus, an “Assessment, Performed,” and not attributes of “Procedure, Performed” or “Diagnostic Study, Performed.” The profile addresses routine Xray, CT scans, Fluoroscopy, Angiography, Mammography, CR (don’t know what the acronym means), DR (don’t know what the acronym means). It does not address PET or SPECT imaging or radiotherapy or implanted seeds, but I think it is consistent with the original intent of the EP measure that drove the QDM decision.

Consider removing Radiation Dose and Radiation Duration as attributes in QDM and address the issues as components of "Assessment, Performed" based on an assessment of imaging performance.