| OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github |
Yes, if we change the field name from place_of_service_concept_id to caresite_source_concept_id and caresite_concept_id. This is obviously not backwards compatible, but will be consistent with Omop CDM conventions. Maybe done for CDM 6.x
@christian_reich , why did place_of_service_concept_id break out of the visit table into care_site table when we moved from CDM 4 to 5?
Is ambulatory surgery, an
All change can cause confusion, but the risk in this case should be very low because we are not deprecating existing concepts. Further, our proposal will have robust ancestor mapping - and the changed concepts will be child if the existing concepts.
A data partner may map to any any level of the hierarchy, and we can go up or down the hierarchy
I would say it’s more #3 and maybe #1. Right now, we classify ambulatory surgeries as outpatient visits since patients do not have a room; however, there are cases when the procedure might not go as expected and a patient has to be admitted. If we want to look at all procedures that might have this transition, it’s a little unclear to me. I can see going the #1 route and classifying a care site using OMOP code 8883 (Ambulatory Surgical Center), but I would think it would be nice to also have a new visit type for ambulatory surgery for easier analysis since from a practical point listing locations and their services can be difficult. I am curious to see what others think.
You hit the nail on the head @cukarthik ; the problem is that in most data sources, although it is called ‘place of service’ - it is not an attribute of the place, but it is an attribute of the service itself. In US health care, care-site is not a ‘credentialing’ information, but a ‘claim’. e.g. place of service information comes in every claim on CMS 1500 form.
That’s not what happened. In 4, we had ORGANIZATION and CARE_SITE. That was the same two-layer hierarchy we have now for VISIT_OCCURRENCE and VISIT_DETAIL. We abandoned it, because there is no way this can be harmonized or standardized in any reasonable way. We got rid of ORGANIZATION, and left CARE_SITE, which is a physical place for any type of Visit to happen.
@Gowtham_Rao: Show them our proposed table.
We (@Christian_Reich @Dymshyts @Dave_Kern @Gowtham_Rao) worked on cleaning up these concepts, and would like the communities input. See document. We propose to change the domain for the vocabulary ‘Place of Service’ (standard concept) to ‘Visit’, because we found that ‘Place of Service’ is an attribute of the Visit and not attribute of ‘Care Site’ as discussed here.
We then mapped (using concept_relationship and concept_ancestor table) the concepts in ‘Place of Service’ vocabulary belonging to the ‘Visit’ domain to other standard concept’s in Visit domain.
What is the definition for “intensive care” visit?
Why is “Urgent Care” an Office Visit with the definition: "Office Visit = ‘Patient goes to provider, but not inpatient, emergency room, ambulatory surgical center or other specialized units’?
Why is “Skilled Nursing Facility” labeled as “Inpatient” and not “Long Term Care”? Maybe I should ask the definition of Long Term Care instead?
These are services that are also called ‘critical care’, ‘ICU’ etc. Intensive care are for patients with severe and life-threatening illnesses and injuries, which require constant, close monitoring and support from specialist equipment and medications in order to ensure normal bodily functions (Ref)
From patients point of view, the ‘Urgent care’ does not lead to overnight stay in the hospital. The experience is like going to a Doctor’s office visit. (Ref) The main difference between traditional office visit and urgent care is a) no need for appointment, b) they will handle minor stuff like splinters, small wounds, acute infections, etc. that are not life-threatening emergencies.
In both Inpatient and Long Term Care, patient sleep in a healthcare facilities bed that is not ‘home’. But the distinction between long-term vs short-term is not unambigious. How do we know that ‘Skilled Nursing’ was a long-term or short-term. When does a short-visit become long, 7 days, 30 days, 180 days, 365 days? Inpatient was thought to be the safest mapping.
The proposed vocabulary additions need clear definitions and conventions to be useful.
What’s the definition for “other specialized units”? Office Visit needs to be distinguished from the Outpatient Visit. Why isn’t Urgent Care an “other specialized unit”?
I agree the distinction is ambiguous. We need better definitions. I mapped Skilled Nursing Facility to Long Term Care based on the term for Concept Name = “Long Term Care Visit”. From Usagi:
Long Term Care Visit has a term name = Non-acute institutional stay. In my opinion, SNF, Rehab, LTC, etc. fall under the Non-acute institutional stay definition.
I still don’t understand the definition for an “intensive care visit”. I know the definition for the care site “intensive care”. The link you provide gives the definition for an intensive care Care Site. It seems that care sites and visits are being combined.
Thanks! There is an opportunity to improve. In the US health Care claims system, HIPAA place of service is an attribute of the visit and not caresite. Why - because it is information that is provided at the claim level.
https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/place-of-service-codes/Place_of_Service_Code_Set.html
Mapping that into higher order visits are done using omop generated vocabulary. That mapping was done by the OHDSI community in past one month and information was shared on this forum. Active roles were played by
@jenniferduryea also helped
We can improve the omop generated vocabulary in a future release if the community agrees and thinks it’s of value.
Plus - we don’t have code level best practice instructions documented in omop vocabulary. E.g. each code does not have an instruction manual - a limitation
Themis could tackle what omop generated vocabulary means what. E.g. what is intensive care.
However, external vocabulary adapted by OHDSI like place of service, type of bill may not need much discussion.
These are some OMOP generated concept_id’s that are present in OMOP vocabulary. Do we know when was it introduced. It is incorrectly labelled as belonging to ‘CMS place of service’ vocabulary. CMS place of service vocabulary are here https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/place-of-service-codes/Place_of_Service_Code_Set.html . Should we assign a new vocabulary to these codes?
Hi, @Christian_Reich, @Gowtham_Rao
I’m curious if there have been any changes or progresses of place of service concepts since MAR because we need more detailed concepts for visit detail table.
For CDM v5, I need these concepts for three tables, visit, visit_detail, care_site.
According to the CDM document, I have to find “Place of Service Vocabulary” for admitting/discharge source concept id in visit_occurrence & visit_detail tables. (may mean ‘vocabulary_id’=‘place of service’, and there are 60 standard concepts)
And also I need to find “Place of Service Concept ID” for place of service concept id in care_site table, referred to visit tables via care_site_id. Does it mean ‘domain’=‘place of service’ like the explanation usually does? There are 491 non-standard concepts only. Maybe I can use 60 standard concepts mentioned above.
I remember (sorry I couldn’t find where the link is…) it was discussed that how to follow-up the exact care sites where the patient was during hospitalization. It can be followed-up by care_site_id from Visit_detail table.
Then we need more detailed concepts of medical department, but 60 standard concepts (domain=visit, vocabulary=place of service) are not sufficient.
We are cleaning this up as we speak. Unfortunately, the ball is in my court, which means it can’t come out quickly, because I am swamped. Hope to finish it over the weekend and present the proposal here.
Very happy to hear that, I am waiting for the completion with pleasure.
Thank you for all of your hard work.
Your waiting has come to an end: New Comprehensive Hierarchy for Providers, Visits (and Place of Service, Specialty, Care Site). Let us know how it will work in the Korean setting.
@Christian_Reich, we are reviewing to see if THEMIS should address this. However, tell me if I’m wrong here, but it looks like this is a current Vocabulary task not a THEMIS task. If you disagree, we will continue to dig into this topic.
No, it’s a THEMIS task (and therefore a vocabulary task). I just took it out from here, because I think the community will have strong opinions. But if not, and I got it right first time - even better.
