Upcoming OOO | | |
Specimen CMT - review of terms with questions | Yes | Send a reminder for concept map to Shaun - Riki to do this ear wax - review domain - change to molceular Aspirate_Nasal is post-coordinated, while NasalAspirate is pre-coordinated - ideally we would like folks to use prototype + source site, but when a lab supports only a single entry, then Usage is for clinical domain, so for pre and post-coordinated terms the usage should be the same NHSN terms are outdated, so do not import at this time - Riki to check with Sheila on progress to get updated list(s) Nodule could be a specimen for both micro and pathology - will need to write up comments for each domain as to what kind of tests this specimen is submitted for pathology = for histologic evaluation micro = for culture evaluation (bacterial, fungal, mycobacterium)
OralSwab - is discouraged has 2 preferred alternatives: Saliva (we have), OralSwab_Buccal - leave as is PapSmear - currently mapped to a collection from 3 sites (confirmed - and same swabbing is also used for GC/Chlamydia testing per Riki’s OB/GYN connection) mapping to Source site will be problematic, as SPM-8 cannot repeat and we cannot get a single term in SCT for these disparate sites for HPV molecular testing will have to follow what the company recommends to collect - may need a different entry here under molecular
|
Call Adjourned | | 11:58 AM ET |
Previous Action Items
| No | |
Specimen CMT pilot implementers | No | |
Specimen CMT - Hosting Options | No | How can we publish the content in the dB? How do we decide what format to share this in - get input from EHR-s and LIS vendors. Write letter of mulitple stakeholders to request EHR-s and LIS vendors to implement indicating that this is a patient safety issue, as incorrect Abx treatment will contribute to multi-drug resistance (use CTSI findings to provide background) Nancy is talking to DHQP about the linkage with specimen collection While we have HIT certification that is for the EHR-s there is currently no enforcement for implementation at the organizations need C-suite buy-in Professional organizations - like CAP and ACOS and AJCC get them to write the synoptic reports (better structuring of data) - for surgical aspects - similar to what CAP has done for Cancer (though they do not have the SCT codes included in the past - may be including SNOMED CT starting in 2025, but they are also using the SCT codes for observables) https://www.facs.org/for-medical-professionals/news-publications/news-and-articles/bulletin/2021/12/synoptic-reporting-for-cancer-surgery-current-requirements-and-future-state/: The four CoC accreditation standards that include synoptic operative reporting requirements apply to sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer (Standard 5.3), axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer (Standard 5.4), wide local excision for primary cutaneous melanoma (Standard 5.5), and colonic resection for colon cancer (Standard 5.6). These accreditation standards were developed from the evidence-based recommendations for cancer surgery detailed in the Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery manuals.7,8 try to get AMA support to get providers to adopt this Reach out to IDSA, too
|
Specimen CMT - education | No | Need education for providers and IT folks that helps with set up of the EHR-S / LIS configuration if we have a use case of how a patient is impacted on their journey through the healthcare system - CAP created a nice video that showed how patient care was affected by incorrect data https://infobeta.cap.org/shield/
|
Specimen CMT - tracking implementation impact Setting baseline Define metrics
| No | |
Specimen CMT - Compare to NHS Medical Terminology testing | No | Will get updated vocab at a later date |
LOINC to SNOMED CT mapping | No | |
Future projects for this call after CMT | No | |
)