| Submitted By: Craig Newman / Altarum | |
|---|---|
| Data Element Information | |
| Use Case Description(s) | |
| Use Case Description | Pulse Oximetry (CCHD) screening should be performed for each of the nearly 4,000,000 infants born in the United States each year. Abnormal screening pulse oximetry triggers CCHD screening. Data is shared with the local Public Health Critical Congenital Heart Defects (CCHD) program in most states and territories. |
| Estimated number of stakeholders capturing, accessing using or exchanging | CCHD programs exist in most states and attempt to collect data on all newborns in the jurisdiction |
| Healthcare Aims |
|
| Maturity of Use and Technical Specifications for Data Element | |
| Applicable Standard(s) | LOINC 73700-7 - CCHD newborn screening interpretation LOINC Preferred Answer List LL2453-0 |
| Additional Specifications | Publish HL7 version 2 implementation guide http://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=366 US Core profile resources |
| Current Use | Extensively used in production environments |
| Supporting Artifacts |
CCHD data is collected by public health programs across the country although most data collection is currently manual or via paper. The state of Michigan is receiving electronic data from at least one hospital site. |
| Number of organizations/individuals with which this data element has been electronically exchanged | N/A |
| Potential Challenges | |
| Restrictions on Standardization (e.g. proprietary code) | None |
| Restrictions on Use (e.g. licensing, user fees) | none |
| Privacy and Security Concerns | Parent's may opt out of testing (but this choice should still be captured and shared) |
| Estimate of Overall Burden | This data is being collected by EHRs and/or devices today, but there is very little support for electronic exchange of the data. Vendors would need to support electronic data exchange (either as a v2 message or by exposing the Observations necessary to convey the data elements). Development would also be needed on the Public Health side to receive the data electronically or to query for it. The use of v2 messaging would require some implementation effort by the submitting hospital site as workflows which trigger sending data would need to be validated and tested. The use of FHIR API to query for data would reduce the implementation burden on hospitals but would make the Public Health workflow more complicated. |
| ONC Evaluation Details Each submitted Data Element has been evaluated based on the following 4 criteria. The overall Level classification is a composite of the maturity based on these individual criteria. This information can be used to identify areas that require additional work to raise the overall classification level and consideration for inclusion in future versions of USCDI |
|
|---|---|
| Maturity – Standards/Technical Specifications | Level 1/2 - Must be represented by a vocabulary standard or an element of a published technical specification |
| Maturity - Current Use | Level 2 - Used at scale in more than 2 different production environments |
| Maturity - Current Exchange | Level 2 - Demonstrates exchange between 4 or more organizations with different EHR/HIT systems |
| Breadth of Applicability - # Stakeholders Impacted | Comment Level - Used by few stakeholders, or for narrowly defined conditions or events |
Comment