Mapping Acute Coronary Syndrome Registries to SNOMED CT

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Background: Malaysia and Sweden have mapped their acute coronary syndrome registries using SNOMED CT. Since similar-purposed patient registries can be expected to collect similar data, these data should be mapped to the same SNOMED CT codes despite the different languages used. Previous studies have however shown variations in mapping between different mappers but the reasons behind these variations and the influence of different mapping approaches are still unknown.

Objectives: To analyze similar-purposed registries and their registry-to-SNOMED CT maps, using two national acute coronary syndrome registries as examples, to understand the reasons for mapping similarities and differences as well as their implications.

Methods: The Malaysian National Cardiovascular Disease - Acute Coronary Syndrome (NCVD- ACS) registry was compared to the Swedish Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive Care Admissions (RIKS- HIA). The structures of NCVD-ACS and RIKS-HIA registry forms and their distributions of headings, variables and values were studied. Data items with equivalent meaning (EDIs) were paired and their mappings were categorized into match, mismatch, and non-comparable mappings. Reasons for match, mismatch and non-comparability of each paired EDI were seen as factors that contributed to the similarities and differences between the maps.

Results: The registries and their respective maps share a similar distribution pattern regarding the number of headings, variables and values. The registries shared 101 EDIs, whereof 42% (42) were mapped to SNOMED CT. 45% (19) of those SNOMED CT coded EDIs had matching codes. The matching EDIs occurred only in pre-coordi- nated SNOMED CT expressions. Mismatches occurred due to challenges arising from the mappers themselves, limitations in SNOMED CT, and complexity of the registries. Non-comparable mappings appeared due to the use of other coding systems, unmapped data items, as well as requests for new SNOMED CT concepts.

Conclusions: To ensure reproducible and reusable maps, the following three actions are recommended: (i) develop a specific mapping guideline for patient registries; (ii) openly share maps; and (iii) establish collaboration between clinical research societies and the SNOMED CT community.

• References

• 1 Leavy M, Gliklich R, Dreyer N. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User’s Guide.. 3rd ed. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014
• 2 European Medicines Agency. Patient Registries [Internet]. 2016 [Cited 2016 Apr 29]. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000658.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac0580961211.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Cross-border PAtient REgistry iNiTiative (PARENT) Registry of Registries (RoR). Registry of Registries [Internet]. 2016 [Cited 2016 Apr 29]. Available from: http://patientregistries.eu/ror.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Mohd Sulaiman I, Sheikh Ahmad MK, Bouzekri K, Ismail O. Introducing SNOMED CT to cardiology, from Malaysia. Eur Heart J. 2015; 36: 1634-1639.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Liu FX, Rutherford P, Smoyer-Tomic K, Prichard S, Laplante S. A global overview of renal registries: a systematic review. BMC Nephrol. 2015; 16: 31.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Haussig S, Schuler G, Linke A. Worldwide TAVI registries: What have we learned?. Clin Res Cardiol. 2014; 103: 603-612.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Spisla CM, Lundberg CB. Standardization of patient registries for improved data collection and outcome measurement. Proceeding of the 11th International Congress Nursing Informatics. Montreal, CA: 2012: 391.
  Google Scholar
• 8 Horttana B-M, Ericsson E. Automated data transfer from EHR systems to national quality registries using SNOMED CT. Paper presented at: SNOMED CT Expo. Montevideo: 2015
  Google Scholar
• 9 Chute CG. Clinical classification and terminology: some history and current observations. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2000; 7: 298-303.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (IHTSDO). SNOMED CT Starter Guide. 2014 Available from http://snomed.org/starter.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Friedman C, Shagina L, Lussier Y, Hripcsak G. Automated encoding of clinical documents based on natural language processing. J Am Med Informatics Assoc. 2004; 11: 392-402.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Nadkarni PM, Ohno-Machado L, Chapman WW. Natural language processing: an introduction. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011; 18: 544-551.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Abdul Manaf NA, Bouzekri K, Lukose D. Harmonizing EHR databases with SNOMED CT. Paper presented at: SNOMED CT Implementation Showcase. Amsterdam: 2012
  Google Scholar
• 14 Gøeg KR, Chen R, Hojen AR, Elberg P. Content analysis of physical examination templates in electronic health records using SNOMED CT. Int J Med Inform. 2014; 83: 736-749.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Randorff Hojen A, Gøeg KR. SNOMED CT implementation - Mapping guidelines facilitating reuse of data. Methods Inf Med. 2012; 51: 529-538.
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Lee DH, Lau FY, Quan H. A method for encoding clinical datasets with SNOMED CT. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010; 10: 53.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Pathak J, Wang J, Kashyap S, Basford M, Li R, Masys DR. et al. Mapping clinical phenotype data elements to standardized metadata repositories and controlled terminologies: the eMERGE Network experience. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011; 18: 376-386.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Karlsson D, Gøeg KR, Orman H, Hojen AR. Semantic Krippendorff’s α for measuring inter-rater agreement in SNOMED CT coding studies. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014; 205: 151-155.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Andrews JE, Richesson RL, Krischer J. Variation of SNOMED CT coding of clinical research concepts among coding experts. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2007; 14: 497-506.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Jernberg T, Attebring MF, Hambraeus K, Ivert T, James S, Jeppsson A. et al. The Swedish web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies (SWEDE- HEART). Heart. 2010; 96: 1617.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Chin S, Jeyaindran S, Azhari R, Wan Azman W, Omar I, Robaayah Z. et al. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) registry - leading the charge for National Cardiovascular Disease (NCVD) database. Med J Malaysia. 2008; 63: 29-36.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Mohd Sulaiman I, Sheikh Ahmad MK. SNOMED CT Cardiology Reference Set Development, Malaysia. Paper presented at: SNOMED CT Expo. Amsterdam: 2014
  Google Scholar
• 23 International Health Terminology Standards Development Organisation (IHTSDO). SNOMED CT Editorial Guide. Jul 2016. Available from: http://snomed.org/eg.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Wade G, Rosenbloom ST. Experiences mapping a legacy interface terminology to SNOMED CT. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8 (Suppl. 01) S3.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Sundvall E, Qamar R, Nyström M, Forss M, Petersson H, Karlsson D. et al. Integration of tools for binding archetypes to SNOMED CT. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8 (Suppl. 01) S7.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Qamar R, Rector A. Semantic mapping of clinical model data to biomedical terminologies to facilitate data interoperability. In: Proceedings of the Healthcare Computing Conference. 2007
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 International Health Terminology Standards Organisation (IHTSDO). SNOMED CT search and data entry guide. Apr 2016. Available from: http://snomed.org/searchguide.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Rosenbloom ST, Miller RA, Johnson KB, Elkin PL, Brown SH. Interface terminologies: facilitating direct entry of clinical data into electronic health record systems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006; 13: 277-288.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Cornet R, Nyström M, Karlsson D. User-directed coordination in SNOMED CT. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2003; 192: 72-76.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Campbell JR, Talmon G, Cushman-Vokoun A, Karlsson D, Campbell WS. An Extended SNOMED CT Concept Model for Observations in Molecular Genetics. In: Proceeding of the AMIA Annual Symposium. 2016 In press.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Magdal U, Dybkaer R, Olesen H. Properties and units in the clinical laboratory sciences, Part XXIII. The NPU terminology, principles and implementation - a user’s guide (Technical Report 2011) (IFCC-IUPAC). Clin Chem Lab Med. 2012; 50: 35-50.
  PubMedGoogle Scholar