OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

Blood Pressure Mapping


(Priyam Munjpara) #1

Hi OHDSI’ans,

Here, I am facing problem in mapping Measurement (for Vitals) Table for Blood Pressure which is Observable Entity in Measurement Domain.

So here is the problem. I have field called in my source data Blood Pressure which has values like While sitting, While Lying etc. and another field called Blood Pressure Side which has values Left and Right and the other fields are for Systolic BP and Diastolic BP which has actual values and has Unit mm Hg.

Now in our Athena we have different concepts for Blood Pressure as below:

  1. Blood Pressure - 4326744
  2. Lying blood pressure - 4060832
  3. Standing blood pressure - 4060833
  4. Sitting blood pressure - 4060834
  5. Systolic blood pressure - 4152194
  6. Standing systolic blood pressure - 4292062
  7. Sitting systolic blood pressure - 4232915
  8. Lying systolic blood pressure - 4248525
  9. Diastolic blood pressure - 4154790
  10. Standing diastolic blood pressure - 4268883
  11. Sitting diastolic blood pressure - 4248524
  12. Lying diastolic blood pressure - 4236281 etc.

Now which one i need to use when I am mapping this particular Vital in Measurement table and how ?

Thanks & Regards
Priyam Munjpara


Ankle-Brachial Index(ABI) mapping
(Anna Ostropolets) #2

There is no good way to store both sides and position, so you’ll have to figure out what’s more important to you: sitting or left and map to it :). The full name can still be stored in the measurement_source_value so that you can distinguish.

You can theoretically store Standing/ Sitting or Left/Right using LOINC Meas Vals in the value_as_concept_id, but it’s by far not the most elegant solution.
Just curious: what’s the % of records for which you actually have both position and side?


(Andrew Williams) #3

Sounds like an opportunity to propose a THEMIS convention, ideally on the basis of the relative clinical importance of sitting vs side.


(Priyam Munjpara) #4

Thank you for your reply @Anna. It helped.


(Priyam Munjpara) #5

Yes. But at first I have to be sure about it.


(Chris Knoll) #6

I would not recommend this: the value_as_concept is supposed to be used (as you know) to store values of the measure when they are some categorical value (ie: positive, negative, etc).

The observation table has a ‘qualifier’ value (although I can not find from the documentation which domain of concepts are used in this column; the documentation for this field is only: “A foreign key to a Standard Concept ID for a qualifier (e.g., severity of drug-drug interaction alert”). Maybe if this type of field was applied to the measurement table, it would give us that flexibility. However, storing multiple qualifiers on a single measurement would not be supported. For that, we’d need something like a measurement_qualifier_xref table that can associate 1-to-many qualifiers from a measurement record to qualifiers.


t