OO CR086 - Reflex Testing

Return to OO Change Requests page.

Submitted by:	Revision date: <<Revision Date>>
Submitted date:	Change request ID:
Standard/IG: Implementation Guide	Artifact ID, Name:

Resolution

Return to OO Change Requests page.

Submitted by: Pilots	Revision date: <<Revision Date>>
Submitted date: Mar-2012	Change request ID: OO CR086
Standard/IG: Implementation Guide	Artifact ID, Name: <<Artifact ID, Name>>

Issue

Do we permit reflex testing as both the addition of a new OBR/OBX as well as adding only one or more new OBXs to an existing OBR? Both are currently done by multiple laboratories (including both by the same lab)

Discussion

• 21-Jun-2012 - Concerned that having multiple options creates confusion and conflicts with micro parent/child. When done on a culture, then should using parent/child.
  • Suggestion to clarify that reflex tests are communicated using parent/child. We know that is not testable at this point, so it cannot be more than guidance. Will arrive at a conclusion on 26 Jun.

• 12-Jul-2012 - We could not complete this item in time. Motion to consider this for future use. Bob Yencha, Ken McCaslin

Recommended Action Items

• 24-Jul-2012 - Get feedback from the Laboratory Results Workgroup (Bob Dieterle) on use case whether we need to support both new OBR/OBX, or new OBX for existing OBR, or both and then determine how to support.
• 14-Aug-2012 - Ken will reach out to Bob to determine what current status is.

Resolution

• Bob Dieterle - 23 August 2012
  • Reflex testing maybe represented either as additional OBX to an original OBR or additional OBR/OBX. If the second is true the OBR must reference the original OBR that generated the reflex using the parent/child concepts already in place and both have the link back to the same encounter.
  • They requested that work be done with LOI IG WG to communicate the reflex across the LOI/LRI IGs from the LIS to the EHR.
  • still have work to do.