‹ Home
Exported

CSTE National ELR Workgroup

Welcome to the CSTE National ELR Workgroup Basecamp! We hope you will utilize the space to share resources with colleagues, start discussion threads, and identify topics for the workgroup to tackle on future calls. All workgroup members will have the opportunity to join. Please note that you may edit your notification preferences to suit your needs (and your email inbox). If you are not already on the ELR distribution list and would like to receive call communications, please enroll using this subscription form (copy and paste in browser): https://app.smartsheet.com/b/form/5a91a4579952496682084796b82112e6
Becky Lampkins, Manager, Surveillance/Informatics Program at CSTEMegan Toe, CSTEScott Troppy, Surveillance Epidemiologist at MA DPHMeredith Lichtenstein, CSTEAmy Drake, NMJohn RobertsNancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics SpecialistErin Holt, TDHRita Altamore, EpidemiologistDavid DiCesareJason HallWalter Kemper, ELR Coordinator, NC DHHS Div of Public HealthJulie LuepkeCarmen Pugh, Labcorp Manager State Reporting at LabCorpTom Safranek +399 others
Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist
Hi all,
something I would like to see on an upcoming call (maybe September) is a discussion of HAI reporting from the ELR-surveillance system point of view. What are the common issues in ELR for getting these reports and susceptibilities? Are there vendor specific issues/concerns? How about reporting requirements -- e.g., in CT our requirement is any suggestion of a CR, even if not confirmed. Issues with getting this data into surveillance systems and use?

Ideas, comments?
2 Notified 86 people

Comments & Events

Annie Fine Annie Fine
Great topic! 
Notified 1 person
Randi Hathaway Randi Hathaway
I agree this is a great topic. In TN, a good portion of messages that fail in our surveillance system are due to incorrect formatting of parent-child relationships and messages with missing parent results. Although our Rhapsody is able to consume and process parent-child relationships there seems to be a limit to the number of these relationships in a message that it can handle. This is something we have been working on correcting but haven't found a good fix yet. As messages become more complex and contain many of these relationships in a single message, I know it would be helpful for us to talk through some solutions. 
Notified 3 people