A colleague has a question about the meaning and use case for the above concept which has no subtypes.
We already have 172508004 |Destruction of ciliary body (procedure)| and 231738000 |Partial excision of ciliary body (procedure)| which do have subtypes. These procedures can be performed either for size reduction of the ciliary body to reduce its functionality in glaucoma, or to destroy or remove lesions of the ciliary body. Given this, these procedures cannot be categorised as subtypes of "Reduction of ciliary body (procedure)".
If "Reduction of ciliary body (procedure)" cannot serve as an umbrella term for the various specific procedures used to achieve it, does it still make sense to keep this as an active concept? It seems unlikely that this code would be entered into an EMR, which would typically record the specific procedure performed.
If it is not useful, should it be inactivated as ambiguous, possibly equivalent to "Partial excision of ciliary body (procedure)" or "Destruction of ciliary body (procedure)"?
Many thanks for your input.
5 Comments
Michael Boland
I can't think of a good use for "Reduction of ciliary body" as it is vague and covered by the other two (destruction, excision) so I favor retiring it.
Eric Brown
This is not something that I've ever done nor do I remember ever seeing "reduction of ciliary body" in a patient's chart. So, I'd be fine with retiring it too.
Ian Rodrigues
I agree too. Makes sense to inactive it.
Sally Baxter
also agree - haven't heard this term
Elaine Wooler
Thank you all for the comments. That has helped to get a clinical sense check before inactivation.
FYI. Penny Livesay