Recheck Examinations and Results Of course it’s hard. That’s what makes it difficult.

A recheck is a PROCEDURE with:  Implied content  Physical examination  History  Implied context or focus  Previous diagnosis or procedure  An outcome  Findings/assessments

1. Code the procedure Existing concept captures procedure and implied context: History and physical examination, follow-up (procedure)

Code the context: Post-coordinate object of the recheck using “Has focus” attribute: History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus Diabetes mellitus History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus Ovariohysterectomy

Coding recheck “diagnoses” Post-operative state (finding) has been suggested ISA Post-procedural state finding Interprets General clinical state  No equivalent term to use for rechecks of disorders  Vacuous unless further specified  NOT a diagnosis or finding in itself  NOT an appropriate medical record entry in itself!

Post-operative state, specified? Option 1:  Add subtypes to Post-operative state:  Post-operative state—satisfactory  Post-operative state—unsatisfactory  Enter appropriate subtype in EMR

Option 1 PRO  Simple  Allows searching by outcome CON  Limited expressivity  How to specify nature of “unsatisfactory”?  How to link outcome to specific procedure?

Post-operative state, specified? Option 2a: Post-coordinate using Has interpretation: Post-operative state (finding) ISA Post-procedural state finding Interprets General clinical state Has interpretation: [ ……..] ?

Option 2a/2b PRO:  May be sanctioned by SNOMED  Potential expressivity CON:  How to link outcome to specific procedure?  Appropriate values for “Has interpretation” not yet defined

Problems with “Has interpretation”  Allowed values not yet determined  Interpretation of “normal” not simple:  No abnormality present vs No abnormality detected  “Normal” post-op status not necessarily = “no abnormality”  May not allow specific abnormal findings eg “infection” or “poor wound healing.”

Other options for coding outcomes: Use General body state finding:  Progress satisfactory  Patient's condition deteriorating  Patient's condition poor  Patient's condition the same  Patient's condition unstable

General body state finding PRO:  “Progress satisfactory” acceptable as “diagnosis”  Allows searching by outcome CON: Less clear how to code negative outcomes  No generic “Progress unsatisfactory”  How to specify exact nature of problem?  How to link specific abnormality to “outcome” finding?

Also previously proposed: Complications of surgical procedure PRO:  Can link to specific procedure by using Temporally follows Procedure X CON:  No equivalent term for all disorders  Not clear how to specify nature of complication

Specifying nature of abnormal findings: Post-coordinate Associated morphology to one of proposed “outcome” findings? PRO: Potential expressivity CON: No sanctioned and tested approach to this Doesn’t work for infection—big problem

Infection is not a morphology Cannot specify “infection” by post-coordinating existing morphologies like Purulent discharge (morphology) Such constructions will not be found by searches for “infection” nor are all infections characterized by purulent discharges

I am the great and powerful SNOMED….  Ignore the man behind the curtain  Balloon not fully inflated  Cannot find Kansas  May not take Toto  Knots tied by previous owner of balloon cannot be untied

So what DO we recommend? A conservative approach, recognizing:  That it is more vital NOT to say anything false than to say everything that is true  That current realities of SNOMED and medical records systems limit expressivity

Code the recheck procedure History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus [diagnosis or procedure being rechecked] Specifies:  That this is a recheck  Object of recheck

Code the findings of the recheck  If patient doing well, use Progress satisfactory  If patient has a problem, enter most appropriate diagnosis, such as Post-operative wound infection Non-union of fracture  Can post-coordinate a finding site to further specify the diagnosis

Bottom line: We CANNOT currently recommend any construction that would link the recheck procedure to specific findings or outcomes.

WHY NOT?  SNOMED does not support or sanction this level of granularity  None of proposed approaches have been tested  Retrieval of information so coded cannot be guaranteed

Example 1 Recheck of surgical procedure to correct anterior cruciate ligament rupture, healing well, suture removal

Example 1 Code the two procedures: Suture removal History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus [specific procedure used] Code the “diagnosis”: Progress satisfactory

Example 2 Recheck mandibular fracture, fracture repair site infected with purulent discharge

Example 2 Code the recheck procedure: History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus [specific procedure used] Code the “Diagnosis”: Post-operative wound infection Note: not important to code the discharge as it is only a symptom of the infection, which has been captured

Example 3: Dog hit by car, had hip replacement for shattered femoral head and also splenectomy for ruptured spleen Hip replacement doing well but abdominal incision has dehisced.

Example 3 Code the recheck procedure: History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus Splenectomy Has focus Replacement of femoral head by prosthesis

Example 3 cont’d Code the “diagnosis”: Wound dehiscence Finding site Abdominal wall (in this case, specify finding site to clarify which surgical wound dehisced)

Example 4 Cat rechecked for abscessed bite wound on face, treated medically with antibiotics and hot compressing at home. Abscess resolving, but cat now has a new abscess on tail.

Example 4 Code the recheck procedure: History and physical examination, follow-up Has focus Abscess of face (disorder) Code diagnosis: Abscess (disorder) Finding site Tail In this case, need to specify finding sites to distinguish between old and new abscess