I would like to seek LOINC users advice on the “standardized” display name for laboratory results in eHR.
Just wonder any members encounter some questions about the uniqueness of test display name during the secondary use of lab test results for data analysis and research.
For a toxicology test as an example, the measurement of serum Amikacin may have the property of [Mass/Volume] or [Moles/Volume]. For our standardized eHR test display name, it would be “Amikacin, serum or plasma, random” which not including the Property attribute (Unit) along with the test name. This is because we see there are some labs reporting “ug/mL”, whereas some reporting as “mg/L” for the measurement of serum Amikacin.
However, we are always questioned by stakeholders (IT or non-clinical lab professions) arguing whether there can have a test name including its unit of measure in a single field for test display name. i.e. “Amikacin, serum or plasma, random (ug/mL)”.
We appreciate any idea and advice on this issue of standardized test display name along with a “standardized” unit.
We’ve found limitations indisplay field length limits use of fully defined display names. We’re using a combination of a standard syntax with abbreviations to address this issue. We publish a table of abbreviations in our online test catalog for provider reference. Epic and Sunquest are in use at our institution. If you’d like a copy of our policy I am willing to share. You can reach me at email@example.com.
This is a related question: How are labs planning to address the MU stage 2 requirement to send LOINC codes electronically — specifically, in which OBX, 3.1 or 3.4? And as importantly, what description do the labs and/or clinicians prefer – LOINC Long Name, LOINC Short Name, or the lab’s local terms/abbreviations? I assume that labs are free to use whatever description they want to in conjunction with the LOINC codes.