4
Vote

ISA11 repetition support

description

I just tried out the parser on a 271 file. When just one EB03 value is present, it interprets it fine:

EB1*88~

  
  1
  
  
  88
When there is a repeating EB03 value, it isn't parsed out correctly:

EBI*82^68^54^41~

  
  I
  
  
  82^68^54^41
It would be useful for X12Parser to support repeating elements as this is part of the standard.

comments

johnstraka wrote Jan 30, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Wow, Codeplex sucks...I enclosed the XML in code tags and it still doesn't preserve it?

wrote Feb 1, 2013 at 1:20 AM

wrote Feb 21, 2013 at 11:46 PM

dstrubhar wrote Sep 15, 2013 at 1:29 PM

I think you have to insert it as a code snippit otherwise it things you are using wiki shortcuts.
I'm not sure this is a problem.
Your EB03 looks like a composite. IT will parse out correctly if the ^ is specified as the component separator in your ISA segment. If you show me what your ISA segment looks like (first 106 characters in the file), I can determine if this is a file issue or a parsing issue.

wrote May 7, 2014 at 8:33 PM

snuxoll wrote May 7, 2014 at 8:39 PM

I am encountering the same issue when parsing a 271, the following EB segment:
EB*B*IND*1^47^48^50^88^98^AL^35^86^MH^UC*MC*104 - LIM - Adult*27*0~
Results in a single EB loop when parsing, with "1^47^48^50^88^98^AL^35^86^MH^UC" as the value for the EB03 segment. Per the standard, this should result in 11 EB loops with the individual values separated by the repetition separator (^) being placed into the EB03 segment.

stokara wrote Feb 16, 2015 at 9:19 PM

The response I get is using the caret for ISA16 - Component Element Separator and right curly brace for ISA11. I replaced all of the right curly braces in the input with caret and parser did better but still does not correctly set the description for each service type code:

Here is the unmodified response I am getting from the vendor:


ISA|00| |00| |ZZ|ZIRMED |ZZ|605 |140417|2100|}|00501|000015485|1|P|^~GS|HB|ZIRMED|111|20140417|2100|15317|X|005010X279A1~ST|271|0001|005010X279A1~BHT|0022|11|2501|20140417|210000~HL|1||20|1~NM1|PR|2|CMS|||||PI|CMS~PER|IC||UR|http://www.cms.gov/HETSHelp/|UR|http://www.cms.gov/center/provider.asp~HL|2|1|21|1~NM1|1P|2|ZIRMED|||||XX|1234567890~HL|3|2|22|0~TRN|2|217643527|9ZIRMEDCOM~TRN|2|220686598|9ZIRMEDCOM|ELR ID~TRN|1|218559149|9ZIRMEDCOM|ELI ID~NM1|IL|1|DOE|JANE|A|||MI|123456789A~N3|333 SOMEWHERE STREET~N4|ANYWHERE|WA|982081941~DMG|D8|19421205|F~DTP|307|RD8|20140306-20140410~EB|I||54}41~EB|1||88~EB|1||30}BV}BU}BT}AG}A7}A5}83}76}69}49}48}45}42|MA~DTP|291|D8|20081001~EB|C||30|MA||26|1216~DTP|291|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|C||30|MA||29|1216~DTP|291|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|C||45}42|MA||26|0~DTP|292|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|1||30}UC}DM}BV}BU}BT}AL}AK}AJ}AI}A8}A6}A4}98}86}83}76}73}69}67}53}52}51}50}42}40}39}38}37}36}33}3}28}27}26}25}24}23}2|MB~DTP|291|D8|20081001~EB|C||30|MB||23|147~DTP|291|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|C||30|MB||29|0~DTP|291|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|A||UC}DM}BV}BU}BT}AL}98}86}83}76}73}69}53}52}51}50}40}39}38}37}36}33}3}28}27}26}25}24}23}2|MB||27||.2~DTP|292|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|C||AJ}67}42|MB||23|0~DTP|292|RD8|20140101-20141231~EB|R||88|OT~REF|18|S5932 029~DTP|292|D8|20130501~LS|2120~NM1|PR|2|HEALTHSPRING LIFE & HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.~N3|2900 N Loop West|Suite 1300~N4|Houston|TX|77092~PER|IC||TE|6155658476|UR|www.mycignahealthspring.com~LE|2120~SE|46|0001~GE|1|15317~IEA|1|000015485~

GaltSalt wrote Feb 17, 2015 at 1:29 PM

The issue, as I noted in my post, is that this library hard codes the repetition character as a 'U'.

This is not only an illegal character for a separator, but as noted with the OP, the EB segments are not broken out.

I wasn't connected to the repository, so I couldn't update the Separator enum, or the constructors for the Interchange object. This needs to happen.

wrote Feb 17, 2015 at 1:31 PM

stokara wrote Feb 17, 2015 at 3:09 PM

I changed the char from U to } and recompiled and although it now separates the ServiceTypes, it does not correctly assign the Lookup.Description which remains null

EricDalnas wrote Jan 10 at 9:56 PM

The problem is the repetition delimiter is not coded at all in this parser. You can fudge it by changing the subelement delimiter to the repetition delimiter. There is also a problem with the ansi-5010Specification.xml where the EB segment needs this change for industry code(Service Type Code). If you change this you will get the Description.
<Element Name="Industry Code" Reference="03" Type="ID" MinLength="1" MaxLength="3" QualifierSetRef="Service Type Code"/>