[CQM-2057] For CMS188 Route Code missing for Patient Data in Cypress3.0.0alpha6 Created: 06/23/16  Updated: 04/30/19  Resolved: 04/30/19

Status: Closed
Project: eCQM Issue Tracker
Component/s: None

Type: EH/CAH eCQMs - Eligible Hospitals/Critical Access Hospitals Priority: Blocker
Reporter: Sudhir Nair (Inactive) Assignee: Joelencia Leflore
Resolution: Done Votes: 0
Labels: None

Attachments: Text File 1_2_N CAP.txt     JPEG File 4a33fd2a-3885-11e6-9cb6-9e88acff5105.JPG     PNG File Screen Shot 2016-06-27 at 8.51.47 AM.png     PNG File Screen Shot 2016-06-27 at 8.53.50 AM.png    
Issue Links:
Cloners
is cloned by CYPRESS-690 Cypress Alpha patients for CMS 188 mi... Closed
Relates
relates to CQM-1690 Value Set for Route is missing from H... Closed
Solution: Please refer to the issue linked below for the answer to your question.
Solution Posted On:
2016 Reporting Period EH eCQMs:
CMS188v5/NQF0147
Impact: High
Comment Posted On:

 Description   

This is an issue already raised in github. Please find details in below link
https://github.com/projectcypress/cypress/issues/524#issuecomment-227824635

There is some confusion in Patient Data generated for CMS188 and measure specifiaction defined in Cypress.

One of the patient said to be qualified for Denominator & Denominator Exclusion as per Cypress Test Data doesn't have route code, whereas the measure specification looks for routecode due to which status are getting mismatched.

Attached is the QRDA for patient and screenshot from cypress

 Comments   
Comment by Joelencia Leflore [ 11/22/16 ]

Thank you for your question. The attribute value set was dropped as a result of the misplacement of the attribute on the lefthand side of the "satisfies any" clause.

In discussions with the measure steward, it has been determined that measure calculations should not be affected by the missing attribute as route information is embedded in the medication value set IV, IM, PO Antimicrobial Medications.

Comment by Michelle Knighton (Inactive) [ 10/28/16 ]

Dave, have you reached out to the measure stewards to determine which file (human readable vs HQMF) is accurate? Is this issue corrected with Cypress v3.0.2? The ATLs will need to know which standard to hold vendors to before moving forward with testing this CQM.

Comment by Sourav Khemka (Inactive) [ 10/18/16 ]

Any update on this yet?

Comment by David Czulada [ 06/27/16 ]

Sudhir-

This appears to be a mismatch between the Human Readable logic and the HQMF. The Human Readable logic indicates that the route is required. However, this requirement is not specified in the HQMF.

I've attached a screen shot of the Human Readable logic, and a screen shot of the HQMF.

-Dave

Generated at Tue Mar 18 16:50:23 EDT 2025 using Jira 9.12.16#9120016-sha1:6bee0863f3e6dbb91e4be2d992a3b6761c21c9e0.