# Help identifying the best LOINC code for CDA Specimen Collection Template

**URL:** <https://forum.loinc.org/t/help-identifying-the-best-loinc-code-for-cda-specimen-collection-template/3084>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [June 15, 2026, 10:24pm UTC](https://forum.loinc.org/t/help-identifying-the-best-loinc-code-for-cda-specimen-collection-template/3084 "2026-06-15T22:24:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rmerrick](https://forum.loinc.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/90ced4/32.png) [@rmerrick](https://forum.loinc.org/u/rmerrick)\
**Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 10:24pm UTC](https://forum.loinc.org/t/help-identifying-the-best-loinc-code-for-cda-specimen-collection-template/3084/1 "2026-06-15T22:24:02Z")

</div>

It seems that in IHE’s XD-Lab we have been using an incorrect LOINC to represent the Specimen Collection section in the CDA: here is the definition from XD-Lab:

 ![image](https://forum.loinc.org/uploads/default/original/1X/b9688f8c089d4ec3df5a150ce31aa892ab2bc3da.png)

 ![image](https://forum.loinc.org/uploads/default/original/1X/0022edfc4f839060762ec49843c747f3c95609ef.png)

[https://loinc.org/33882-2/](https://loinc.org/33882-2/) = Collection date of Specimen

the template provides the date/time as well as the type and the source site elements, so the question was raised if this should not be identifying the Specimen Collection Method instead?

In the Anatomic Pathology Structured Report (APSR) we are not using LOINC, but descendants from 17636008 | Specimen collection (procedure) - should we be using [https://loinc.org/53903-1/](https://loinc.org/53903-1/) though that is not part of the template being reported, OR should we just update this to just require the TemplateId (as done in HAI reporting IG from NHSN = [HL7 Standards Product Brief - HL7 CDA® R2 Implementation Guide: Healthcare Associated Infection (HAI) Reports, Reease 4, STU 4.4.1 - US Realm | HL7 International](https://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=570)) or do we need a new LOINC (in the doc class?) to denote the section?

Others have suggested to use: [https://loinc.org/66746-9/](https://loinc.org/66746-9/) instead

If anyone has ideas, please let me know,

Riki