2023-05-25 LabMCoP Meeting notes

X

Nancy Cornish

CDC

X

Manjula Gama-Ralalage

CDC

-

Riki Merrick

APHL

X

Christina Gallegos

APHL

X

Amy Liu

Inductive Health / APHL

-

Raj Dash

Duke / CAP

X

John Snyder

National Library of Medicine (SNOMED CT)

-

Andrea Pitkus

UW

X

Kathy Walsh

Labcorp

-

Rob Hausam

Hausam Consulting

-

Doug Franklin

APHL

X

Pam Banning

3M

Upcoming OOO

Yes

Nancy: 6/8, 6/15, 6/29

Previous Action Items

Yes

• Link at the bottom of meeting notes

• Nancy to Follow up with Dr. Singh on getting the TRUU LAB call information out there to get added to the calls

  • Ask Riki about this and TRUU Lab Meeting (planned for sometime in June - not scheduled yet)

• @Nancy Cornish: Report on review of the specimen attributes in the Medical Microbiology Testing in Primary Care Struthers et al. United Kingdom and NHS Manson publishing - (we wanted SNOMED to host this and we were concerned that they were international – would it apply)

  • Nancy - UK is standardized so SNOMED coding would work there and maybe Canada

  • Nancy to read the book for each submission to see if their Specimen CMT would be comparable (likely), but need more work to determine

• @Nancy Cornish: Update on CDC train connection and what is needed for topic outline - for both specimen and general lab medicine education (TRUU-Lab)

• Need to discuss action items on the next call:

• SNOMED request for Mid-turbinate

  • Riki to submit the requests discussed on 5/11 - still to do -- had to request a new CRS account – not available before leaving for APHL week

  • There was push back from FDA – will need to discuss this with FDA

  • Raj to reach out to CAP to get contacts at vendors that we don’t have contact for - see here: Vendor Connections

  • Andrea will see, if she can use the Specimen CMT content in their cancer project and report back

Question from CLSI

Yes

• Nancy - Just Published: CLSI AUTO17-Ed1 AUTO17 provides guidance on achieving semantic interoperability for IVD test results.

• SNOMED requst for Mid-turbinate specimen (see action items)

  • Nancy did research on adverse events of mid-turbinate swabs:

    • Fractured mid turbinate

    • CSF leak

    • 50% of mid turbinate specimens were incorrectly performed (study done by ENT)

  • SNOMED codes need to be updated and everyone should follow CDC guidelines

Reporting Biomarkers to Cancer registries

 No

Lab Test Naming Conventions

 No

Andrea planning this

• SHIELD call topic (maybe June 13)

  • TRUU Lab

  • LOINC

Specimen CMT - review of terms with questions

 Yes

• Skin biopsy

  • Selected term with where SPM 8 (source site), SPM 7 (collection method), and SPM 9 (spatial orientation) are required

• Specimen

  • issue - multiple descriptions

    • We can add multiple codes to same HL7 table to same PHLIP pref term

  • Amy to test this out to see if it comes across

Specimen CMT - Hosting Options

• How can we publish the content in the dB?

  • Allow access somehow to query the dB

  • as access or excel

  • Using FHIR conceptMap similar to https://build.fhir.org/conceptmap-example-specimen-type.html - based on this profile: https://build.fhir.org/conceptmap.html

  • @riki.merrick to ask Eric if he still has that or how he built it:

  • ANSWER FROM ERIC:

    • if you look in the xml source https://build.fhir.org/conceptmap-example-specimen-type.xml.html . you can see how it is mapped. 

    • I am not sure if you mean the table rendering or creating the concept map from a spreadsheet or CSV file.  The FHIR build tool did the table rendering for that mapping, I think I entered the data by hand, or Grahame did it. It would not be hard to create a script to create a concept map from an excel or csv file if needed.  The table needs to be large enough to make it worthwhile though. you could even create formula cells in the spreadsheet to generate the XML or json for each item. and then copy to a text editor and append to the Metadata fields.

Specimen CMT - education

No

Specimen CMT - potential pilot sites

No

• Goal is to have some implementers lined up by April - so who to reach out to?

  • Review where we are: Vendor Connections - updated some notes there

Specimen CMT - tracking implementation impact

• Setting baseline

• Define metrics

No

• Setting baseline

Specimen CMT - Compare to NHS Medical Terminology testing

No

Future projects for this call after CMT

No

• In general the call is intended as a forum for ANY messaging related issues to work out.

• In the past we have

  • reviewed containers re-vive that - and how does that interact with devices (UDI identification?)

  • review code systems around additives (HL70371 and SCT substance and product hierarchies)

  • started work on cross-mapping between HL7 method codes and SNOMED CT procedure / technique concepts

    • American College of Surgeons is working on procedure protocol and synoptic data elements / surgical synoptic reports - we could work with them together on that