Summary
As advised at the September 2022 business meetings the At risk of <x> (finding) content in remaining in the Clinical finding hierarchy. The descriptions and modelling for each concept are being reviewed and updated, as required, to improve clarity of meaning and management of the hierarchy. Twenty three of the at risk concepts have been identified as having meanings that are unclear and the Nursing CRG is being asked to provide input on each concept. Further information is provided below and in the briefing note (coming shortly) included in the attached documents.
Please provide the responses as a group by no later than December 22nd.
Note:
- Background information on the discussions had prior to the decision being made can be accessed via the links and documents below.
- The ICNP Editorial Board will also be providing input on the at risk concepts which are part of the ICNP reference set.
- Changes to the content will not be visible in the Daily Build browser or SNOMED International SNOMED CT Browser at this point in time.
Relevant Documents
Links
2022-11-14 NCPT CPG Meeting - Nutrition Group
2022-09-26 SNOMED Editorial Advisory Group Meeting
2022-09-26 - CMAG Meeting - Content Managers Advisory Group
2022-04-05 SNOMED Editorial Advisory Group Meeting
Example of Concept Changes
| Before | After |
|---|---|
|
|
Actions Requested
Please advise:
- Which of the concepts from the list below are being used by nurses?
- For each concept being used please provide a definition.
- Which concepts would be recommended for inactivation?
- Which concepts would be recommended for re-terming?
Concept List
| Concept | In Use | Meaning | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|
702533004 Low risk environment for patient discharge (finding) | |||
288850009 Risk situation requiring placement on supervision register (finding) | |||
225939001 Likely to spill hot drinks (finding) | |||
409050004 Postpartum risk (finding) | |||
409049004 Delivery risk (finding) | |||
409048007 Labor risk (finding) | |||
409046006 Perinatal risk (finding) | |||
409045005 Finding related to perinatal risk factor (finding) | |||
409044009 Contraception risk (finding) | |||
409043003 Infertility risk (finding) | |||
409042008 Fertility risk (finding) | |||
409041001 Reproductive risk (finding) | |||
409040000 Finding related to reproductive risk factor (finding) | |||
408890007 At risk for spiritual dysfunction (finding) | |||
405785004 At risk for relapse (finding) | |||
309247009 Foot at risk (finding) | |||
276601004 Fetus at risk (finding) | |||
255598000 Head of femur at risk (finding) | |||
225943002 At risk of cross-infection (finding) | |||
199312002 Finding related to risk factor in pregnancy (finding) | |||
129690006 At risk for elimination problem (finding) | |||
129845004 |At risk for imbalanced nutrition, less than body requirements (finding)| | |||
48501009 |Alteration in nutrition: potential for more than body requirements (finding)| |
1 Comment
Zac Whitewood-Moores
I would see Jim Case's analysis as really helpful and illuminating and have called for similar in a number of areas for several years. Rather than delaying significantly in the international edition, I would suggest that many of these areas should be implemented ASAP and if individual extensions or implementations wish to delay implementation or make modifications to them there are mechanisms to do so. It is becoming challenging for equivalence to be processed and therefore interoperability to be properly supported if we keep supporting legacy rather than implement optimisations and improvements. Soner the batter as far as I can see. Many of the At risk concepts are really ambiguous concepts that are probably groupers for Finding of risk of x, with subtypes which should exist for Low, Medium, High risk etc. There is almost always a risk of something occurring and thus low risk is usually clinically the least risky.