Mapping of HIE CT terms to LOINC®: analysis of content-dependent coverage and coverage improvement through new term creation.

Objective: We describe and evaluate the mapping of computerized tomography (CT) terms from 40 hospitals participating in a health information exchange (HIE) to a standard terminology. Methods: Proprietary CT exam terms and corresponding exam frequency data were obtained from 40 participant HIE sites that transmitted radiology data to the HIE from January 2013 through October 2015. These terms were mapped to the Logical Observations Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC®) terminology using the Regenstrief LOINC mapping assistant (RELMA) beginning in January 2016. Terms without initial LOINC match were submitted to LOINC as new term requests on an ongoing basis. After new LOINC terms were created, proprietary terms without an initial match were reviewed and mapped to these new LOINC terms where appropriate. Content type and token coverage were calculated for the LOINC version at the time of initial mapping (v2.54) and for the most recently released version at the time of our analysis (v2.63). Descriptive analysis was performed to assess for significant differences in content-dependent coverage between the 2 versions. Results: LOINC's content type and token coverages of HIE CT exam terms for version 2.54 were 83% and 95%, respectively. Two-hundred-fifteen new LOINC CT terms were created in the interval between the releases of version 2.54 and 2.63, and content type and token coverages, respectively, increased to 93% and 99% (P < .001). Conclusion: LOINC's content type coverage of proprietary CT terms across 40 HIE sites was 83% but improved significantly to 93% following new term creation.

Standard Anatomic Terminologies: Comparison for Use in a Health Information Exchange-Based Prior Computed Tomography (CT) Alerting System.

BACKGROUND: A health information exchange (HIE)-based prior computed tomography (CT) alerting system may reduce avoidable CT imaging by notifying ordering clinicians of prior relevant studies when a study is ordered. For maximal effectiveness, a system would alert not only for prior same CTs (exams mapped to the same code from an exam name terminology) but also for similar CTs (exams mapped to different exam name terminology codes but in the same anatomic region) and anatomically proximate CTs (exams in adjacent anatomic regions). Notification of previous same studies across an HIE requires mapping of local site CT codes to a standard terminology for exam names (such as Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes [LOINC]) to show that two studies with different local codes and descriptions are equivalent. Notifying of prior similar or proximate CTs requires an additional mapping of exam codes to anatomic regions, ideally coded by an anatomic terminology. Several anatomic terminologies exist, but no prior studies have evaluated how well they would support an alerting use case. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the fitness of five existing standard anatomic terminologies to support similar or proximate alerts of an HIE-based prior CT alerting system. METHODS: We compared five standard anatomic terminologies (Foundational Model of Anatomy, Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms, RadLex, LOINC, and LOINC/Radiological Society of North America [RSNA] Radiology Playbook) to an anatomic framework created specifically for our use case (Simple ANatomic Ontology for Proximity or Similarity [SANOPS]), to determine whether the existing terminologies could support our use case without modification. On the basis of an assessment of optimal terminology features for our purpose, we developed an ordinal anatomic terminology utility classification. We mapped samples of 100 random and the 100 most frequent LOINC CT codes to anatomic regions in each terminology, assigned utility classes for each mapping, and statistically compared each terminology's utility class rankings. We also constructed seven hypothetical alerting scenarios to illustrate the terminologies' differences. RESULTS: Both RadLex and the LOINC/RSNA Radiology Playbook anatomic terminologies ranked significantly better (P<.001) than the other standard terminologies for the 100 most frequent CTs, but no terminology ranked significantly better than any other for 100 random CTs. Hypothetical scenarios illustrated instances where no standard terminology would support appropriate proximate or similar alerts, without modification. CONCLUSIONS: LOINC/RSNA Radiology Playbook and RadLex's anatomic terminologies appear well suited to support proximate or similar alerts for commonly ordered CTs, but for less commonly ordered tests, modification of the existing terminologies with concepts and relations from SANOPS would likely be required. Our findings suggest SANOPS may serve as a framework for enhancing anatomic terminologies in support of other similar use cases.

Patient crossover and potentially avoidable repeat computed tomography exams across a health information exchange.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure the number of repeat computed tomography (CT) scans performed across an established health information exchange (HIE) in New York City. The long-term objective is to build an HIE-based duplicate CT alerting system to reduce potentially avoidable duplicate CTs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis was based on HIE CT study records performed between March 2009 and July 2012. The number of CTs performed, the total number of patients receiving CTs, and the hospital locations where CTs were performed for each unique patient were calculated. Using a previously described process established by one of the authors, hospital-specific proprietary CT codes were mapped to the Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC®) standard terminology for inter-site comparison. The number of locations where there was a repeated CT performed with the same LOINC code was then calculated for each unique patient. RESULTS: There were 717 231 CTs performed on 349 321 patients. Of these patients, 339 821 had all of their imaging studies performed at a single location, accounting for 668 938 CTs. Of these, 9500 patients had 48 293 CTs performed at more than one location. Of these, 6284 patients had 24 978 CTs with the same LOINC code performed at multiple locations. The median time between studies with the same LOINC code was 232 days (range of 0 to 1227); however, 1327 were performed within 7 days and 5000 within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion (3%) of our cohort had CTs performed at more than one location, however this represents a large number of scans (48 293). A noteworthy portion of these CTs (51.7%) shared the same LOINC code and may represent potentially avoidable studies, especially those done within a short time frame. This represents an addressable issue, and future HIE-based alerts could be utilized to reduce potentially avoidable CT scans.

Assessing the performance of LOINC® and RadLex for coverage of CT scans across three sites in a health information exchange.

We evaluated the performance of LOINC® and RadLex standard terminologies for covering CT test names from three sites in a health information exchange (HIE) with the eventual goal of building an HIE-based clinical decision support system to alert providers of prior duplicate CTs. Given the goal, the most important parameter to assess was coverage for high frequency exams that were most likely to be repeated. We showed that both LOINC® and RadLex provided sufficient coverage for our use case through calculations of (a) high coverage of 90% and 94%, respectively for the subset of CTs accounting for 99% of exams performed and (b) high concept token coverage (total percentage of exams performed that map to terminologies) of 92% and 95%, respectively. With trends toward greater interoperability, this work may provide a framework for those wishing to map radiology site codes to a standard nomenclature for purposes of tracking resource utilization.