Draft USCDI V6 Data Elements
USCDI is a standardized set of health data classes and constituent data elements for nationwide, interoperable health information exchange. It is managed by ASTP, a federal agency under HHS. As a baseline for exchange across care settings and use cases, USCDI provides a standardized set of data elements to drive interoperability. USCDI groups data elements into data classes that share a common theme. Annual USCDI updates help drive interoperability by keeping pace with clinical, technology, and policy changes. USCDI is referenced by HTI-2, TEFCA, and other health IT initiatives.
February 2025
If you agree with APHL’s comments, or if you have additional comments for ASTP, you can submit feedback through ASTP’s United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) | Interoperability Standards Platform (ISP) before . Also, please email melanie.kourbage@aphl.org with the feedback. APHL will endeavor to incorporate member and partner concerns into our feedback to ASTP.
ASTP released the Draft USCDI V6 on . The public comment period closes . The final release is targeted for .
Here is a link to the ASTP Bulletin that summarizes the draft and its changes: ASTP Standards Bulletin 2025-1 | HealthIT.gov.
Here is a link to the USCDI V6 draft: United States Core Data for Interoperability (USCDI) - Draft Version 6.
In Draft V6, ASTP added 6 new data elements. The Unique Device Identifier has a possible impact on laboratory data. Of the substantive changes/updates that they highlight in their summary, these are the most important for laboratorians to be aware of:
Laboratory Order, Diagnostic Imaging Order, and Clinical Test Order would include LOINC as the applicable standard
Updated the applicable vocabulary to the latest versions of LOINC and SNOMED as of the publication of Draft USCDI v6
APHL’s draft comments on Draft V6
· Date/timestamps: ASTP’s current approach is to use a single procedure performance date/time element in USCDI to cover all lab relevant date/time, which include: Specimen collection date/time; Specimen received date time; Test performed date/time; Report released date/time. APHL raises the concern that most systems don’t model these observations as procedures. APHL recommends at a minimum adding data elements to capture Specimen Collection date/time (https://www.healthit.gov/isp/taxonomy/term/3256/level-0 ), Specimen receipt at the lab date/time (submitted to USCDI+ for the PH Lab Reporting Use case, but not available on the USCDI+ website yet), Laboratory Test performed data/time (https://www.healthit.gov/isp/taxonomy/term/2436/level-0 ), and Report released date/time (submitted to USCDI+ for the PH Lab Reporting Use case as a corollary to eCR report date element, but not available on the USCDI+ website yet https://uscdiplus.healthit.gov/uscdiplus?id=uscdi_record&table=x_g_sshh_uscdi_uscdi_elements&sys_id=04a7ba8a1b367d1094626318624bcbf3&view=sp ).
· Assigning Authority: APHL recommends ASTP include the assigning authority with ANY identifier data element (in all HL7 products this is part of the various supported identifier type data type). This comment applies to Identifier (), Specimen Identifier (https://www.healthit.gov/isp/taxonomy/term/3721/uscdi-v5 ), Medical Record Number (), and Medicare Patient Identifier. We recommend that the definitions for these data elements include the following language: "Alphanumeric value that uniquely identifies the patient's health record over time, at minimum within one organization, ideally at the national level, including a means to identify the organization or system that assigned it."
DE | APHL Draft Comment February 2025 |
Condition and Disposition of Specimens | APHL requests that ASTP rename this element to "Specimen Condition" and use the improved valuesets defined by the HL7 Orders & Observations Workgroup, with APHL’s support, for specimen condition. https://confluence.hl7.org/display/OO/Specimen+Condition+and+Specimen+Reject+Reason+Vocabulary). APHL made similar comments in September 2024 (Comment 14135), April 2024 (Comment 13837), and September 2023 (Comment 13519). https://www.healthit.gov/isp/comment/14135 |
Laboratory Test Performed Date | APHL requests an update to the definition to actually define what the name implies which is the “Date (and optionally time) when testing was conducted by the testing laboratory.” APHL made similar comments in September 2024. https://www.healthit.gov/isp/comment/14139
ASTP’s current approach is to use a single procedure performance date/time element in USCDI to cover all lab relevant date/time, which include: Specimen collection date/time; Specimen received date time; Test performed date/time; Report released date/time. APHL raises the concern that most systems don’t model these observations as procedures. APHL recommends at a minimum adding data elements to capture Specimen receipt at the lab date/time, Laboratory Test performed data/time, and Report released date/time. |
ADD: Specimen Received datae/time | ASTP’s current approach is to use a single procedure performance date/time element in USCDI to cover all lab relevant date/time, which include: Specimen collection date/time; Specimen received date time; Test performed date/time; Report released date/time. APHL raises the concern that most systems don’t model these observations as procedures. APHL recommends at a minimum adding data elements to capture Specimen receipt at the lab date/time, Laboratory Test performed data/time, and Report released date/time. |
ADD: Report Released date/time | ASTP’s current approach is to use a single procedure performance date/time element in USCDI to cover all lab relevant date/time, which include: Specimen collection date/time; Specimen received date time; Test performed date/time; Report released date/time. APHL raises the concern that most systems don’t model these observations as procedures. APHL recommends at a minimum adding data elements to capture Specimen receipt at the lab date/time, Laboratory Test performed data/time, and Report released date/time. |
Medical Record Number | APHL recommends ASTP include the assigning authority with ANY identifier data element (in all HL7 products this is part of the various supported identifier type data type). Thus we propose to update the definition to: Other partners, including CSTE, echoed this recommendation in September 2024. APHL made similar comments in September 2024. |
Specimen Identifier | APHL requests that ASTP update the definition text to "Alphanumeric value to uniquely (at minimum, within one organization) identify an individual specimen, including a means to identify the organization or system that assigned it. Example includes but is not limited to accession number.” APHL made similar comments in September 2024 (Comment 14137), April 2024 (Comment 13836), and September 2023 (Comment 13464) https://www.healthit.gov/isp/comment/14137 https://www.healthit.gov/isp/comment/13836 https://www.healthit.gov/isp/comment/13464 |
Identifier | APHL recommends ASTP include the assigning authority with ANY identifier data element (in all HL7 products this is part of the various supported identifier type data type). Thus we propose ASTP update the definition to: "Alphanumeric value that should uniquely identify the patient over time - at minimum within one organization, ideally at the national level), including a means to identify the organization or system that assigned it." APHL made similar comments in September 2024. |
APHL also submitted comments during the original open comment period on USCDI V5 in Fall 2024 that ASTP reviewed as they were assembling the V6 standard.