Terminology standardization building a foundation for health information exchange
Download
1 / 60

Terminology Standardization: Building a Foundation for Health - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 1913 Views
  • Uploaded on

Terminology Standardization: Building a Foundation for Health Information Exchange . Siew Lam, MD Sarah Maulden, MD. Terminology Interoperability.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Terminology Standardization: Building a Foundation for Health' - Mia_John


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Terminology standardization building a foundation for health information exchange l.jpg

Terminology Standardization: Building a Foundation for Health Information Exchange

Siew Lam, MD

Sarah Maulden, MD


Terminology interoperability l.jpg
Terminology Interoperability Health Information Exchange

“Interoperability is the ability of a system or a product to work with other systems or products without special effort on the part of the customer.” (www.searchsoa.com)


Slide3 l.jpg

Types of Terminology Interoperability Health Information Exchange

Internal: helps us build the Health Data Repository (HDR) with standardized data from 128 VistA sites

Interagency:

VA and DoD bi-directional data exchange

VA and other agencies such as CDC and IHS

External: VA with the outside world

All Standards & Terminology Services (STS) work to create and maintain terminology content and services supports interoperability both internally and with the non-VA community—with little or no special effort on the part of the user.

1Middleton et al. Health Affairs (Millwood). 2005 Jan-Jun;Suppl Web Exclusives

Terminology Interoperability

3


Presentation topics l.jpg
Presentation Topics Health Information Exchange

  • Overview of Standards & Terminology Services (STS)

  • Why Terminology Standardization is vital to interoperability?

  • Progress to date and ongoing activities

  • Real World Example: Use of SNOMED CT in CHDR

  • Question and Answer


Standardization defined l.jpg
Standardization Defined Health Information Exchange

  • Terminology Standardization is the identification, adoption, implementation, verification, maintenance, and compliance monitoring of data standards

  • Terminology Standardization is foundational to computable, interoperable data sharing across a health care information infrastructure


Goals of standardization l.jpg
Goals of Standardization Health Information Exchange

  • Ensure consistent interpretation of clinical information

  • Support clinical decision making

  • Support interoperability with health care partners

  • Support public health and bio-surveillance activities

  • Improve quality, safety, and cost-effectiveness of patient care


What does sts do l.jpg
What Does STS Do? Health Information Exchange

  • STS is producing:

    • Terminology Content and Model

      • Standard code sets, both internal created and externally obtained

      • A terminology model that outlines how the terminology will be used

    • Terminology Services

      • VistA Terminology Services

      • Clinical HeV Services

      • Non-clinical HeV Services


What does sts do8 l.jpg
What Does STS Do? Health Information Exchange

  • Activities/Projects undertaken to produce content and services are:

    • Clinical Data Standardization

      • Allergies, Problem List, Document Titles, etc.

    • Administrative Data Standardization

      • Standard Data Services (SDS), Demographics

    • HealtheVet Terminology

      • Pharmacy Re-engineering, Lab Re-engineering, etc.

    • Interagency Interoperability

      • CHDR, Lab Data Sharing and Interoperability (LDSI)

    • Terminology Maintenance

      • New Term Rapid Turnaround (NTRT), VistA Lexicon


Standardization progress l.jpg

Audiology & Speech Path Health Information Exchange

Nutrition & Food Service

Encounters

Clinical Decision Support

Allergies/ Adverse Reactions

Demo-graphics (partial)

Event Capture

Immunizations

Vitals

Text Integration Utility

Pharmacy

Laboratory

Orders (partial)

Mental Health

Nursing

Problem List

Home-based Primary Care

Comp & Pension Exam

Radiology

RAI/MDS

Registry Data

Patient Education

Dental

Blind Rehab

Women’s Health

Health Factors

Surgery

Prosthetics

Consults

Clinical Procedures & Medicine

Standardization Progress

VHA Terminology

Standardized and

Implemented

Standard Created –

Being Implemented

Analysis Ongoing

Not Yet Started


Current standardization status l.jpg
Current Standardization Status Health Information Exchange

  • Deployed Standards to VistA

    • Vitals May 2005

    • Allergies July 2005

    • Pharmacy Phase I Sept 2005

    • Document Titles October 2006

    • Orders (selected files) November 2006

    • Lab (chem and hem) July 2007


Upcoming standardization domains l.jpg
Upcoming Standardization Domains Health Information Exchange

  • Future Standard Domains in VistA

    • Encounters 2008

    • Problem List (w/CPRS v28) 2009

    • Immunizations 2009

    • Radiology Reports 2009

    • Anatomic Path./Microbiology 2009


Ensuring accurate term maintenance l.jpg
Ensuring Accurate Term Maintenance Health Information Exchange

  • There are primary 2 concerns with ensuring accurate terminology maintenance:

    • Selecting the correct terms to add to the national standard

    • Seamlessly updating VistA files in a rapid manner

  • The NTRT processes and systems help to mitigate potential issues with each


  • New term rapid turnaround ntrt l.jpg
    New Term Rapid Turnaround (NTRT) Health Information Exchange

    • New Term Rapid Turnaround (NTRT) – the maintenance process for standard data which includes:

      • Receiving submitted terms from users

      • Analyzing submissions to determine suitability in the standard

      • Deploying new terms by pushing them to VistA


    Domain review teams l.jpg
    Domain Review Teams Health Information Exchange

    • The Domain Review Teams determine the appropriateness of a new request for addition to the national standard

      • Team made up of terminology team members and end users (subject matter experts)

      • The Review Team may recommend additions to the standard or that the requester use an existing term


    Ensuring accuracy in ntrt l.jpg
    Ensuring Accuracy in NTRT Health Information Exchange

    • Once a term has been approved for the standard many steps are in place to ensure accurate NTRT pushes including:

      • 2nd review of all terminology authoring

      • Internal testing in production-like VistA account

      • Independent SQA testing

      • Terms at 4 test sites for 24-hours prior to national release


    Ntrt totals l.jpg
    NTRT Totals Health Information Exchange

    • Total New NTRT Terms Deployed to VistA (through May 2008)

      • Vitals 15

      • Allergies 137

      • Document Titles 314


    Sts services vista l.jpg
    STS Services - VistA Health Information Exchange

    • VistA Standardization Tools

      • Tools for extracting, analyzing, and mapping VistA data

      • These tools are integral to the overall VistA standardization effort

    • VistA Lexicon Tools

      • Provide access and maintenance tools for the VistA Lexicon

    • NTRT Update Tools

      • Allows updates to standardized terminology files


    Sts services health e vet clinical l.jpg
    STS Services – Health Health Information Exchange eVet Clinical

    • VA Enterprise Terminology Services (VETS) – Java/Oracle-based development which includes:

      • Terminology Deployment Services (TDS)

        • Allows Terminologists to prepare, test and deploy terminology to VA systems

      • New Term Rapid Turnaround (NTRT) Web Applications

        • Allows field-users to request new terms and track submissions through a web interface

      • Terminology Services

        • Allows other applications to access terminology content

      • VA Unique Identifier (VUID) Services

        • Provides VUIDs through an API or a web interface

      • *Terminology Development Environment (TDE):

        • A terminology authoring tool that is licensed from Apelon but integrates with the other VETS tools


    Sts services non clinical l.jpg
    STS Services – Non-Clinical Health Information Exchange

    • Standard Data Services (SDS) – Java/Oracle-based development which includes:

      • Creation and maintenance of Non-Clinical terms for use in HeV applications

        • Example – demographic data, zip codes, etc.

      • SDS terms primarily stored in the Administrative Data Repository (ADR)

      • Initial implementation to support Enrollment Systems Redesign (ESR) and Replacement Scheduling Application (RSA)


    Vets services l.jpg

    Mapping Health Information Exchange

    Services

    PRE

    Re-engineering

    Lab-R

    Import

    functionality

    HeV Services

    VETS

    CHDR Services

    Vista Deployment Services

    Vista Lexicon

    Vista

    VETS Services

    • Current VETS services provide the ability to create and maintain current terminology standards as well as providing a foundation to support future development of a wide range of services to meet VA business needs


    Case study real world example l.jpg
    Case Study – Real World Example Health Information Exchange

    Using SNOMED CT as a Mediation Terminology


    Using snomed ct as a mediation terminology l.jpg

    Using SNOMED CT as a Mediation Terminology Health Information Exchange

    Mapping Issues, Lessons Learned, and Next Steps Toward Achieving Semantic Interoperability


    Overview l.jpg
    Overview Health Information Exchange

    • Background: Consolidated Health Data Repository (CHDR) project

    • Introduction to SNOMED CT

    • Terminology Mediation Using SNOMED CT for Allergy Reactions: Methods and Results

    • Discussion: Lessons Learned

    • Next Steps


    Introduction l.jpg
    Introduction Health Information Exchange

    • The President has ordered Federal agencies to promote improved healthcare quality and efficiency through secure, standard-based data exchange

    • The Clinical Data Repository/Health Data Repository (CHDR) project exchanges clinical information between Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Department of Defense (DoD)

    • CHDR exchanges standardized, computable data as opposed to text, allowing data to be used in electronic decision support


    Interoperability l.jpg
    Interoperability Health Information Exchange

    • Technical interoperability

      • systems can reliably exchange information without error; textual data exchange

    • Computable Semantic Interoperability

      • Enables interpretation of the exchanged information

      • Requires a shared structure for transmission and a common electronic vocabulary

      • Enables computerized order checks and alerts across institutions


    Chdr example dod data in vista l.jpg

    DoD Health Information Exchange

    CDR/

    Terminology

    Translation

    VA STS

    Terminology

    Translation

    Service

    SCT: 300359004

    DoD translates the data to a SNOMED CT code and sends it to VA through the CHDR framework

    DoD Clinician enters an allergy reaction (“vomiting”) for a patient on erythromycin.

    Data is stored in DoD Clinical Data Repository (CDR)

    STS Services translates from SNOMED CT to VA Unique ID (VUID) for storage in VA HDR

    VA Hospital

    DoD Hospital

    VUID: 4691049

    VA

    HDR

    Allergy can be used in Decision Support within VistA system

    CHDR Example: DoD Data in VistA


    Va dod chdr project l.jpg
    VA-DoD CHDR Project Health Information Exchange

    • Pharmacy and allergy data are exchanged via CHDR between VA and DoD for patients obtaining care in both systems

    • Allergy reactions are exchanged using SNOMED CT, in accordance with Health Information Technology Standards Panel (HITSP) recommendations

    • Each agency maps its allergy reactions to Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine – Clinical Terminology (SNOMED CT); the SNOMED CT codes are then exchanged


    Introduction to snomed ct l.jpg
    Introduction to SNOMED CT Health Information Exchange

    • SNOMED CT was developed by the College of American Pathologists (CAP)

    • Ongoing development, quality assurance, and distribution are now managed by the non-profit International Health Terminology Standards Development Organization (IHTSDO) (www.ihtsdo.org)

    • Versions of SNOMED have been in development since 1965; the current version contains 90% of terminology needed today in healthcare

    • Latest release contains > 357,000 health related concepts gathered from diverse clinical groups including medicine, nursing, laboratory and pharmacy


    Introduction to snomed ct32 l.jpg
    Introduction to SNOMED CT Health Information Exchange

    • Clinical experts develop the definition of a clinical concept, the essential characteristics, clinical attributes and hierarchical relationships to other concepts

    • Every concept can be expressed as a fully specified name, preferred name and synonyms

    • There are about 913,000 expressions that describe the clinical concepts

    • Computable terminology well suited for electronic medical records


    Example of a snomed ct concept l.jpg
    Example of a SNOMED CT Concept Health Information Exchange

    SNOMED CTcode: 195889001

    Fully specified name: legionella pneumonia (disorder) (580047018)

    Preferred name: legionella pneumonia (301372014)

    Synonyms: legionnaire's disease (301373016)

    Is-a: legionella infection

    pneumonia due to aerobic bacteria

    causative agent: legionella

    associated morphology: inflammation

    consolidation

    finding site: structure of interstitial tissue of lung

    Onset: sudden onset, gradual onset

    Severity: mild, moderate, severe, fatal

    Episodicity: new episode, old episode, ongoing episode, undefined

    Course: acute, sub-acute, chronic, cyclic, aggressive course, benign course


    Chdr mediation success l.jpg
    CHDR Mediation Success Health Information Exchange

    • Terminology mediation success rates were calculated for a 5-month period (February-June 2007) and ranged from 74-99%

    • Analysis of mediation failures revealed issues related to mapping and SNOMED CT concept modeling

    • We describe the methodology used, lessons learned, and next steps


    Methods l.jpg
    Methods Health Information Exchange

    5-part terminology mediation strategy:

    • Establish a multi-disciplinary, interagency team of clinicians and terminologists

    • Select a mediation terminology compliant with Consolidated Health Informatics (CHI)/HITSP standards (if possible)

    • Map each agency’s terms to the mediation standard

    • Exchange the mediation codes

    • Coordinate content maintenance plans


    Methods continued l.jpg
    Methods Health Information Exchange continued

    • Business rules for mapping allergy reactions to SNOMED CT were developed jointly by VA and DoD

    • Allergy reactions were primarily signs and symptoms (SNOMED’s Clinical Findings hierarchy), but could be Disorders or other conditions


    Business rules l.jpg
    Business Rules Health Information Exchange

    • SNOMED hierarchies were used in preferential order for mapping:

      1. Clinical Findings (“headache”)

      2. Disorders (“dermatitis”)

      3. Morphologic Abnormality (“blister”)

      4. Observable Entity (“disinhibition”)

      5. Context-dependent Category (“abdominal cramps”)


    Business rules continued l.jpg
    Business Rules Health Information Exchange continued

    • Mapping rules were also created to address the following:

      • Misspellings (“pruritis”)

      • Qualifiers (“severe”, “drug-induced”)

      • Ambiguous terms (“cold”)

      • Synonyms (“anaphylaxis” vs. “anaphylactic shock”)

      • Outdated terms (“hysteria”)


    Mapping validation l.jpg
    Mapping Validation Health Information Exchange

    • 2 reviewers conducted 3 separate reviews

    • Discrepancies were identified in about 5% of total terms, and were corrected

    • An independent review of concepts common to both agencies was performed to ensure accurate translations


    Common and unique allergy reaction concepts l.jpg
    Common and Unique Allergy Reaction Concepts Health Information Exchange


    Mediation success rates l.jpg
    Mediation Success Rates Health Information Exchange

    • Mediation success rate: the percentage of data in one system that is understood and computable by the other system.

    • For each direction of data exchange (outbound vs. inbound) there is a different mediation success rate


    Va to dod mediation statistics l.jpg
    VA-to-DoD Mediation Statistics Health Information Exchange

    VA-to-DoDMediationStatisticsforAllergyReactions, Feb-June2007


    Dod to va mediation statistics l.jpg
    DoD-to-VA Mediation Statistics Health Information Exchange

    DoD-to-VAMediationStatisticsforAllergyReactions, Feb-June2007


    Discussion l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange

    5 Main Causes of Mediation Failures

    • SNOMED CT may contain multiple ways to express a single allergy reaction

    • New reactions were added independently at each agency

      3. Updates to new releases of SNOMED CT did not occur simultaneously

      4. Criteria for inclusion of specific terms as allergy reactions differed between VA and DoD

      5. Divergent approaches to SNOMED CT mapping emerged, despite shared business rules


    Discussion continued l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange continued

    • SNOMED CT may contain multiple ways to express a single allergy reaction.

      • Example: “Nosebleed”


    Discussion continued46 l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange continued

    • Other SNOMED CT mapping dilemmas


    Discussion continued47 l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange continued

    2. New reactions were added independently at each agency

    3. Updates to new releases of SNOMED CT did not occur simultaneously at each agency

    - Needed a maintenance process addressing change in SNOMED CT Concept status (e.g. from Active to Ambiguous, Duplicate, Erroneous, Retired, etc.)


    Discussion continued48 l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange continued

    4. Criteria for inclusion of specific terms as allergy reactions differed between VA and DoD

    Examples:

    • “allergic reaction”

    • “systemic disease”

  • Are these really useful or appropriate terms to describe an allergy reaction?


  • Discussion continued49 l.jpg
    Discussion Health Information Exchange continued

    5. Divergent approaches to SNOMED CT mapping emerged, despite shared business rules

    • Examples:

      • “Orthostatic hypotension (disorder)” vs. “postural drop in blood pressure (finding)”

      • “Hypertension” search yields “Hypertensive disorder, systemic arterial (disorder)” and “finding of increased blood pressure (finding)”


    Lessons learned l.jpg
    Lessons Learned Health Information Exchange

    • Mapping rules must always be tailored to the specific purpose of the mapping.

      • Mapping practices may be influenced by many issues

      • Potential for entire message to fail if any part failed led to establishment of particular mapping guidelines in this context


    Lessons learned51 l.jpg
    Lessons Learned Health Information Exchange

    • Ongoing communication between agencies is essential, even with established mapping rules in place

    • Individual mappers’ clinical backgrounds, familiarity with mapping tools (e.g. CliniClue®), and knowledge of SNOMED CT can influence mapping results

    • Ideally, a common team, process, and toolset would be used for mapping


    Lessons learned52 l.jpg
    Lessons Learned Health Information Exchange

    • Understanding SNOMED CT modeling issues continues to be a challenge, as this requires a sophisticated knowledge of concept modeling and of the evolution of SNOMED CT hierarchies over time

      • Example: What is the difference between a “Finding” and an “Observable Entity”?


    Lessons learned53 l.jpg
    Lessons Learned Health Information Exchange

    • Maintenance plans must include coordination of updates to the standard (SNOMED CT), including plans for synchronization with release schedules

    • Coordination of updates between agencies must be maintained on a regular basis


    A new allergy reactions subset l.jpg
    A New Allergy Reactions Subset? Health Information Exchange

    • A significant outcome of this project is the generation of a new, unique subset of Allergy Reactions which could be submitted for inclusion in SNOMED CT as an official subset

    • It could also be published and shared among federal agencies and non-federal partners


    Hitsp recommendations l.jpg
    HITSP Recommendations Health Information Exchange

    • In December 2007, HITSP designated the VA/Kaiser Permanente (KP) Problem List subset (16,430 entries) as the recommended standard for allergy reactions

    • The previous (CHI) recommendation had been to use the VA/DoD Allergy Reactions subset (864 entries)


    Hitsp recommendations56 l.jpg
    HITSP Recommendations Health Information Exchange

    • Use of the Problem List subset to record allergy reactions may prove problematic

      • “circumoral paresthesia” and “edema of pharynx” are allergy reactions not found in the current Problem List subset

    • Use of the smaller subset, which is specifically created for documenting allergy reactions, would enable simpler data entry, better computing speed and preservation of data integrity

    • Communication with HITSP is ongoing


    Conclusions l.jpg
    Conclusions Health Information Exchange

    • Mapping is relatively resource-intensive and costs of maintenance must be considered

    • Adopting standards natively is more efficient, but we’re not there yet

    • Use of mediation terminologies is an effective, practical method for advancing the goal of semantic interoperability


    Acknowledgements l.jpg
    Acknowledgements Health Information Exchange

    • Patty Greim, RN, MS

    • Glenn Crandall

    • Omar Bouhaddou, PhD

    • Pradnya Warnekar, RPh, MS

    • Laura Megas

    • Fola Parrish, PharmD

    • Michael J. Lincoln, MD


    Contacts l.jpg
    Contacts Health Information Exchange

    • Dr. Siew Lam

      [email protected]

      Dr. Sarah Maulden

      [email protected]

    • Glen Crandall

      [email protected]


    Questions l.jpg
    Questions Health Information Exchange


    ad