LOINC, a universal standard for identifying laboratory observations: a 5-year update.

The Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) database provides a universal code system for reporting laboratory and other clinical observations. Its purpose is to identify observations in electronic messages such as Health Level Seven (HL7) observation messages, so that when hospitals, health maintenance organizations, pharmaceutical manufacturers, researchers, and public health departments receive such messages from multiple sources, they can automatically file the results in the right slots of their medical records, research, and/or public health systems. For each observation, the database includes a code (of which 25 000 are laboratory test observations), a long formal name, a "short" 30-character name, and synonyms.

Development of the Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) vocabulary.

The LOINC (Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes) vocabulary is a set of more than 10,000 names and codes developed for use as observation identifiers in standardized messages exchanged between clinical computer systems. The goal of the study was to create universal names and codes for clinical observations that could be used by all clinical information systems. The LOINC names are structured to facilitate rapid matching, either automated or manual, between local vocabularies and the universal LOINC codes.

Logical observation identifier names and codes (LOINC) database: a public use set of codes and names for electronic reporting of clinical laboratory test results.

Many laboratories use electronic message standards to transmit results to their clients. If all laboratories used the same "universal" set of test identifiers, electronic transmission of results would be greatly simplified. The Logical Observation Identifier Names and Codes (LOINC) database aims to be such a code system, covering at least 98% of the average laboratory's tests.

A comparison of five manually operated coagulation instruments.

The results of activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and prothrombin time (PT) determinations on the single-channel Coag-a-Mate, Coagulyzer Jr., Clotek, Electra 650, and Fibrometer instruments were compared with regard to precision, day-to-day reproducibility of results, and accuracy. There was no significant difference among the machines when PT was analyzed.