Lauri Scharf

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Test display name for EHR #16630
    Lauri Scharf
    Participant

    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.

    in reply to: Orders in LOINC database #16542
    Lauri Scharf
    Participant

    Thanks again, Daniel. I take it the common order set is intentionally small to enable quicker deployment? Or does Regenstrief consider all the codes that were left out to be in need of review before including them?

    in reply to: Orders in LOINC database #16540
    Lauri Scharf
    Participant

    Thank you, Daniel. So how does it differ from the Common Lab Orders Value Set – Version 1.1, which has many fewer items?

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)