| Type | Standard / Implementation Specification | Standards Process Maturity | Implementation Maturity | Adoption Level | Federally required | Cost | Test Tool Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Standard for observation values
|
Final
|
Production
|
 |
Yes
|
Free
|
N/A
|
| Limitations, Dependencies, and Preconditions for Consideration |
Applicable Value Set(s) and Starter Set(s)
|
|---|---|
|
Comment
Submitted by pwilson@ncpdp.org on 2020-11-07
Submitted by gldickinson on 2020-10-23
Preserving Clinical Context
General Comments: USCDI specifies lots of clinical data classes and data elements- Resolving to myriad de-coupled fragments
- With vanishingly little focus on:
- Clinical context and vital inter-relationships, e.g., between problems, diagnoses, complaints, symptoms, encounters, history and physical findings, allergies, medications, vaccinations, assessments, goals/objectives, clinical decisions, orders, results, diagnostic procedures, interventions, observations, treatments/therapies, referrals, consults, protocols, care plans and status...
- Elements and context + purpose of capture: e.g., blood pressure, its measurement (systolic, diastolic), its unit of measure (mm/Hg), its reason for capture, its context of capture (sampling site, sampling method, patient position, at rest/during/post exercise...
It is crucial to consider, determine and resolve how clinical content and context are bound together and preserved in USCDI. The ultimate end user (often a clinician) must be able to readily discern context and inter-relationships – otherwise USCDI places an undue (and often unresolvable) burden on this user. Only the source EHR/HIT system can structure clinical content and context properly. Once data is stuffed into the USCDI framework and related exchange artifact (e.g., FHIR resources) this opportunity is forever lost.