Summary
SNOMED International is looking for input on how clinicians across countries describe procedures that use a specific surgical approach to support development of a naming convention for these types of procedures. In particular we are looking at the joining word used when combining the procedure and approach.
For example:
- Repair of diaphragmatic hernia by abdominal approach (procedure)
- Tympanotomy using permeatal approach (procedure)
- Decompression of nerve via subclavian approach (procedure)
When following up on this please also consider procedures with a specific approach which also include other meanings such as the use of a device device or imaging etc.
For example:
- Fusion of cervicothoracic region of spine with internal fixation by anterior approach (procedure)
- Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair of femoral hernia using synthetic mesh (procedure)
Relevant documents
Actions
| Date | Requested action | Requester(s) | Response required by: | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 April 2020 | Input on surgical approach naming convention |
| Please post your final responses in the Country response table below. Discussion comments can be made as comments. |
Due date extended to 29 May 2020
Links
Country response
| Country | Date | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 30 April | In Dutch, we would usually put the approach in front of the procedure. E.g. 'abdominal repair of diaphragmatic hernia'; 'subclavian decompression of nerve'; 'laparoscopic abdominal hysterectomy'; etc. However, using a signal word is probably clearer. We think 'using' and 'by' would probably both be suitable, and 'by' would cause less confusion because you could then reserve 'using' for devices. |
| Denmark | 2020-05-05 | I can see that in our translation, we have used the same wording for all three examples - probably what is closest to 'by ... approach'. In our ICD translation however, we have used 'via.... approach'. I think that both ‘by’ and ‘via’ describes the route (latin: via) while 'using' is in connection with some device or method. |
| Australia | 2020-05-08 | I agree with the above, "using" is more applicable to something physical (a device). "via" or "by" work - note this definition of "via" has "by way of". I'd probably preference "via" for approach, less word. "by" could be reserved for "techniques"? Also, this is probably just for FSN and Core PTs. As we'd probably also do something similar to Netherlands and reorder/drop words etc. Possibly best to be guided by the members doing translations. |
| Belgium | 2020-05-12 | For these procedures, it seems we translate the FSN quitte literally with keeping the 'approach' at the end of the translated term; The translation and use of 'by', 'using', or 'via' depends on the context as we do not translate 'approach' for each concept in the same way... But at this moment I do not recognise any logical translation pattern. |
| United Kingdom | 2020-05-18 | In a fairly recent substantial piece of work we undertook in consultation with cosmetic surgeons, their preferred representation was 'using .... approach', .and this is the most frequent representation for UK content generally, in relation to 'approach'. The phrasing of further elements would depend on what those elements were, but again, 'using' appears to be the more common representation - 'using mesh' / 'using xxx (imaging) guidance', although things like 'contrast' are always 'with'. |
| Norway | 2020-05-27 | In our national terminology for surgical procedures, the type of access is generally placed early in the description. We agree with Denmark and Australia regarding the meaning of using is connected to an instrument/device. If anatomic access is to be expressed by a prepositional phrase, not early in the description, "via" seems to be the most precise word. "By" is also a possibility, but "by" should probably be reserved for "techniques".. |
| New Zealand | 2020- 05-29 | We agree with Australia: "via" for approach and "using" for medical device for the FSN. We would frequently use approach before procedure (as with the Netherlands) in the PT but suggest that this may lead to some ambiguity if in the FSN. |
| Sweden | 2020-06-01 | Swedish translation guidance is (naturally) different from English translation guidance. It seems strange that we have an opinion in this matter being non-English native speakers, though it's great that all English speakers chime in! |
| USA | 06JUN2020 | Looking at CPT for reference, but far from exhaustively:
NB: The approach is sometimes indicated with an adjective rather than introduced by a preposition (e.g., Percutaneous removal of internally dwelling ureteral stent with radiological supervision and interpretation) |
| Member countries without a CMAG rep |
CMAG response
| Date | CMAG Response | Next steps |
|---|---|---|
Final outcome:
Date:
3 Comments
Feikje Hielkema-Raadsveld
Hi Cathy Richardson I'm covering for Elze during her maternity leave, but I don't seem to have editing rights on this page. Perhaps you can copy the Netherlands feedback into the table?
In Dutch, we would usually put the approach in front of the procedure. E.g. 'abdominal repair of diaphragmatic hernia'; 'subclavian decompression of nerve'; 'laparoscopic abdominal hysterectomy'; etc. However, using a signal word is probably clearer. We think 'using' and 'by' would probably both be suitable, and 'by' would cause less confusion because you could then reserve 'using' for devices.
Cathy Richardson
Feikje Hielkema-Raadsveld and done. Congratulations to Elze!
Cathy Richardson
Thank you for your responses on this topic. Your input was provided to the Editorial Panel. The Panel meet 1 June 2020 and have decided: Use via for "route/approach" and "using" for device.