2023-12-20 Communications and Branding Workgroup Meeting Minutes

Dec 20, 2023

Attendees

Discussion

• Next Workgroup meeting moved to 1/10/24 at 12pm ET.

• Primer on SHIELD for Cap Today

  • Presentation?

  • Summary

  • Questionnaire from CAP Today?

• What type of article would it be?

• What are the main topics we would like discussed in the article

  • Short (5-6 slides) deck with focus areas.

  • Things that labs can be doing now to prepare (a resource guide?)

    • LIS requirements (test build, discrete data elements, encoded data-LOINC, SNOMED, Micro,

    • LIS interface upgrades

• Can we review/approve article?

• Article re-use?

• Timing: No later than June

  • Themed editions (ex LIS, APLIS editions)

  • Be in edition that gets published in conjunction with conferences where the issue may be available.

• From Andrea: It would be great to get at least 1 IVD vendor, 1 SDO representative, 1 laboratory professional/pathologist, and perhaps 1 government agency rep.  I'd like to recommend Hung join us on the short list.   I know the editor of CAP Today and he welcomes informatics topics/articles.  He is also very well known across the laboratory industry (I'd argue, similar to Robert Michel of Dark Daily, which I think you brought up Eric with the Executive War College.

   

  I think it would be good to talk about laboratory informatics brief history (Meaningful Use spurred adoption of LOINC and SNOMED) as that is what many readers will remember/understand, then identify the issues (why SHIELD and what are we addressing)?  

   

  One thing we may want to discuss on the Steering Committee, are recommended steps laboratory professionals can do now to help.   For example: 

1. Those performing laboratory testing using paper and fax processes, may wish to adopt a laboratory information system or similar software to automate processes and receive benefits therein. 

2. LIS test builds should be reviewed to ensure as much of the reported information is discrete and not text blobs, strings, phrases where possible.  Discrete data allows more data to be computer processable and usable by applications both within and external to the laboratory.  Mention how pdf reports are human readable, but not very computer usable.   

3. While it would be good to mention naming of test order and result build items to ensure as much meaning as possible, it would be better to pair with guidance, etc such as from TRUULab (which isn't there yet.) 

4. Next, ensuring lab orders and results are encoded with LOINC and specimen types and sources, organisms, and qualitative result values are encoded with SCT, would be another ask.  Emphasizing the use of encoding for research, clinical trials, where real world data are utilized so they have computerized meaning.

5. Recommendations on HL7 exchange standards, such as use of LRI, ELR for external reporting and working with their customers to send orders with LOI.  Also recognition that these standards may not be utilized when the EHR and LIS vendor are the same and have a shared database with data sharing amongst modules. 

• Stacy: Should we include a patient safety advocate on the list of interviewees?

  • Patient access to lab result data puts them in the mix

• Meeting Chat:

  • 12:24:55 From Andrea Pitkus to Everyone:
    Regulations.gov
    12:57:22 From Andrea Pitkus to Everyone:
    We could see if additional informatics questions could be added to the CAP today survey. When MU came out, We asked them to ask questions about do they have LOINC functionality, SNOMED CT functionality, etc. They added them and LIS vendors answer and it's published
    12:58:04 From Kevin Schap to Everyone:
    We could ask how many of the data elements that support from USCDI v4?
    12:58:15 From Kevin Schap to Everyone:
    they support*
    12:58:32 From Andrea Pitkus to Everyone:
    I like that kevin. More of a breakdown
    12:59:53 From Andrea Pitkus to Everyone:
    One that can be asked in the future is FHIR functionality. Could add now, but knowing it's not ready for lab, especially diagnostic report, a bit hesitant on giving vendors ideas to adopt if not CLIA compliant yet
    13:00:22 From Kevin Schap to Everyone:
    I like that as well
    13:00:46 From Andrea Pitkus to Everyone:
    Could also ask them if they support HL7 LRI v2.51 messaging, ELR 2.51, LOI v 2.51 too.

Action items

On next Workgroup meeting, we will refine our recommendations and collateral for our discussion with the Steering Committee regarding the CAP Today article.

Quick decisions not requiring context or tracking

For quick, smaller decisions that do not require extra context or formal tracking, use the “Add a decision…” function here.

Decisions requiring context or tracking

For decisions that require more context (e.g., documentation of discussion, options considered) and/or tracking, use the decision template to capture more information.

Create decision from decision template