‹ 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
Posted by Riki Merrick ·

Device ID in OBX-17 - length restrictions

We are reconciling ballot comments on LRI this week at the WGM and the following suggestion came up in dealing with the length restriction in OBX-17.1:
Rather than using an NTE, could the longer description just be sent in OBX_17.2, when OBX-17.1 has to be truncated?
Example would look like this:
ID NOW COVID-19_Abb#^ID NOW COVID-19_Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc._EUA^99ELR
 

Comments & Events

Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist
Hi Riki, 

that's fine for us, but we are already building and testing the capacity to take this from HL7 OBX 17.1. I think we'd want to use the same sub-component for consistency across labs - it means extra coding by lab to differentiate between the 2 sub-components being used. It can be done, but that adds to technical staff burden.

But yes OBX 17 much better than NTE!
Notified 139 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
If you can take OBX-17.1 full length, then no need to look at OBX-17.2 as that is the same content - would only need to look at OBX-17.2, if you have length restrictions for OBX-17.1 and that value has been truncated

Riki
Notified 139 people
Randi Hathaway Randi Hathaway
We created a fix in Rhapsody to handle the length issue in OBX-17.1. Will truncate to 20 characters and copy full ID(s) to NTE. We use NBS and it will currently fail messages if OBX-17.1 is greater than 20 characters. For NBS states, the vendor is working to fix this in an upcoming patch release. I would prefer to keep the device ID specs in OBX-17.1 since it seems several states and data system vendors are already building solutions to accommodate in OBX-17.1. I would prefer if flexibility was given in the interim on how to handle this data requirement whether that be in NTE or adding a portion of the ID to OBX-17.2. 

Thanks, 

Randi, TN Dept of Health
Notified 142 people
Jenizah Melendez Jenkins Jenizah Melendez Jenkins
Would something like this work if we can't truncate and the primary DI from GUDID is used?

04015630935406_DII^^99ELR
Notified 142 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
yes - this is the way the DII (for the instrument) or DIT (if used for the test kit) is used.

Riki
Jenizah Melendez Jenkins 👍
Notified 142 people