‹ 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 Emily Roberts ·

NHSN Feed

Hi, 

We received a large batch of messages through NHSN's AIMS feed that have no value in MSH.4.1, which has the facility code. We are not able to process these messages without a value in MSH.4.1. Did any other jurisdiction have this problem today? Not sure if this is an issue on the facility side or the AIMS/NHSN sender side. Any help is appreciated! Thank you!

Emily Roberts
Utah Department of Health

Comments & Events

Steve Barber, eCR Coordinator Steve Barber, eCR Coordinator
Virginia has the same issue.
Notified 157 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
NJ logged an AIMS support issue about this - we are looking into it
Riki
Notified 157 people
Ann Kayser Ann Kayser
Thanks Riki. Minnesota is also experiencing the same issue.
Notified 157 people
Emily Roberts Emily Roberts
Do we have any update on this? We are continuing to get messages from NHSN that have no MSH.4.1. Thanks!

Emily
Notified 157 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
Yes - NHSN updated their production feed - they now have the namespace ID in the dB, so they can provide it ahead of time (and are working on an updated spreadsheet for us to share), but that must have caused the hick-up in the code... I was under the impression they stopped the feed. They are releasing a patch today and hope to be back on-line tomorrow.

Riki
Notified 157 people
Carmela Smith, Informatics Team Lead at NMDOH Carmela Smith, Informatics Team Lead
Riki,

Is there a way to get a list of facilities/labs that are currently reporting through AIMS?


Carmela Smith, MS
Surveillance Systems Epidemiologist


[cid:image003.jpg@01D471CB.CD1767F0]<http://nmhealth.org/>

Infectious Disease Epidemiology Bureau, Epidemiology & Response Division
1190 S. St. Francis Dr. Ste. N1350
Santa Fe, NM 87505
(505) 469-2104
(575) 639-2157
fax:(505) 827-0013
www.nmhealth.org<http://nmhealth.org/>

[cid:image004.png@01D471CB.CD1767F0]<https://www.facebook.com/nmdoh>[cid:image005.png@01D471CB.CD1767F0]<http://instagram.com/nmdoh> [cid:image006.png@01D471CB.CD1767F0] <https://twitter.com/nmdoh> [cid:image007.png@01D471CB.CD1767F0] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/newmexicodepartmentofhealth>

[cid:image008.jpg@01D471CB.CD1767F0]<http://www.phaboard.org/accreditation-overview/what-is-accreditation/>
Accredited since 2015



The information contained in this electronic message is privileged, confidential, proprietary, and intended only for the use of the owner of the e-mail address listed as the recipient of this message. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying of this communication, or unauthorized use is strictly prohibited and subject to prosecution to the fullest extent of the law! If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this electronic message and DO NOT ACT UPON, FORWARD, COPY OR OTHERWISE DISSEMINATE IT OR ITS CONTENTS.
image010.jpg 407 Bytes • Download
Notified 157 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
As far as I know only what is on the COVID Centralized ELR reporters list here: https://app.smartsheet.com/b/publish?EQBCT=6a622ae0402147fd90aac0f3a527642f
The only other way I know would be to see the list of sending jurisdictions (but that would only give you NHSN or eTrue North, not all the facilities. I don't think AIMS tracks all the performing organizations (in OBX-23).

Riki
Notified 157 people
Carmela Smith, Informatics Team Lead at NMDOH Carmela Smith, Informatics Team Lead
Actually, that is really helpful, Riki.
I did not know that we had access to that smartsheet. I’m sure I missed it along the way.

Thank you very much!

-Carmela
Notified 157 people
Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL Riki Merrick, Terminologist at APHL
Hi all - this is NOT related to the MSH-4 issue, BUT to NHSN feed in general.
There were issues with duplicate MSH-10 values, for messages where facilities had made corrections close enough together that they were processed in the same batch.
Here are 2 things that came from this error:
#1: NHSN will push a change out that adds 6 random numbers to the end of their MSH-10, which is currently following this schema: [oid + specimen id + current timestamp in milliseconds]  - that will be rolled out as soon as possible for a new schema to be: [oid + specimen id + current timestamp in milliseconds + 6 character random string] 
#2: Dealing with corrections: For many PHAs it is an issue when a record is sent as corrected, when the actual result value did not change, since many PHAs do not incorporate negatives into their surveillance system, unless they are a correction to a positive result (but in most cases that is not the case in these instances).
So we want to know if it would help the states if we could, at a file level, batch the positives (P), negatives (N) and corrected (C)? 
So, right now we send:
Facility1234.hl7
Facility4567.hl7
 
What if we sent:
Facility1234-P.hl7
Facility1234-N.hl7
Facility1234-C.hl7
 
Facility4567-P.hl7
Facility4567-N.hl7
Facility4567-C.hl7
 
or
 
Facility1234-P-C.hl7
Facility1234-N.hl7
 
Facility4567-P-C.hl7
Facility4567-N.hl7

Any feedback by EOD today would be appreciaed, as NHSN is trying to get this fix out ASAP.
Notified 157 people
Walter Kemper, ELR Coordinator, NC DHHS Div of Public Health Walter Kemper, ELR Coordinator, NC DHHS Div of Public Health
That would be OK for NC.

Walter Kemper
ELR Coordinator, NC EDSS Project
On behalf of State of NC DHHS Division of Public Health
Email: Walter.Kemper@dhhs.nc.gov<mailto:Walter.Kemper@dhhs.nc.gov>
(919) 426-3468 (mobile)
Notified 157 people
Bill Storm, ELR Coordinator Bill Storm, ELR Coordinator
How would we differentiate real corrected negatives from those that are being triggered off something other than the result? We want to be able to receive updates if a lab enters a test result incorrectly as positive when it was truly negative.

The file splitting is fine for Ohio but not sure how that will help the problem other than giving the states the choice to decide if they will use corrected results or not. Can AIMS deliver different files to different paths to the same jurisdiction?
Notified 157 people
Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist Nancy Barrett, Epi 4/PH Informatics Specialist
Hi Rikki,
Sorry I didn't see this earlier. I'm cc'ing Can for his feedback.

Nancy

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
Notified 157 people