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:
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:
Relevant documents
| 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
Links to relevant meeting minutes, discussions and confluence sites e.g. discussions by other groups, project pages etc
Table to be completed by each CMAG member for their country. Please note as per the TOR responsibilities consideration needs to be given to Member countries who are not represented on this group to ensure that their priorities are reflected in the group discussions. Where a second round of review occurs, this table may be duplicated.
| 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 |
The CMAG response(s) which are to be fed back to the relevant group or person e.g. Editorial Advisory Group.
| Date | CMAG Response | Next steps |
|---|---|---|
The action taken by the IHTSDO, Advisory Group or other as relevant. This may be a written summary or link to the relevant Confluence page.