Query check ICD10 trach dxs consistent: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| DIC_implementation_date = 2019-01-22 | | DIC_implementation_date = 2019-01-22 | ||
}} | }} | ||
---- | |||
*The following had been added some time ago | *The following had been added some time ago | ||
::*This can now include: | ::*This can now include: | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::* if there is an [[Acquired Procedure]] of {{CCIWithCode| Tracheostomy creation}}, there has to be a {{TISS w Nr | Trach Tube Present (TISS Item)}} for at least the [[Px Date]] | ::* if there is an [[Acquired Procedure]] of {{CCIWithCode| Tracheostomy creation}}, there has to be a {{TISS w Nr | Trach Tube Present (TISS Item)}} for at least the [[Px Date]] | ||
* This is actually not so. Pt could have the ostomy with no tube in it. Definitely possible for the first one, less likely for the second, but still more likely than I would like to put a check in place. If you are OK with leaving the check out, we should still include a remnant of this discussion so we don't need to have it again. If you want to re-visit, please bring it to JALT or Task. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:51, 2022 February 10 (CST) | * This is actually not so. Pt could have the ostomy with no tube in it. Definitely possible for the first one, less likely for the second, but still more likely than I would like to put a check in place. If you are OK with leaving the check out, we should still include a remnant of this discussion so we don't need to have it again. If you want to re-visit, please bring it to JALT or Task. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:51, 2022 February 10 (CST) | ||
{{Todo | {{Todo | ||
| who = Tina | | who = Tina | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| todo_action = 2022-02-17 | | todo_action = 2022-02-17 | ||
}} | }} | ||
----- | |||
* if any trach-implying dxs are present then pt must have at least one code that indicates that they have a trach : | * if any trach-implying dxs are present then pt must have at least one code that indicates that they have a trach : | ||
Revision as of 11:08, 17 February 2022
| Data Integrity Checks | |
| Summary: | Tracheostomy related CCI and ICD10 codes must be consistent with each other. |
| Related: | Tracheostomy, has one, Tracheostomy complication, hemorrhage from site, Tracheostomy complication, malfunction, Tracheostomy complication, NOS, Tracheostomy complication, tracheo-esophageal fistula, Tracheostomy creation |
| Firmness: | soft check |
| Timing: | |
| App: | CCMDB.accdb |
| Coding: | Query check_ICD10_trach_dxs_consistent |
| Uses L Problem table: | not relevant for this app |
| Status: | ready to implement |
| Implementation Date: | 2019-01-22 |
| Backlogged: | true |
- The following had been added some time ago
- This can now include:
- if there is a Tracheostomy, has one (Z93.0) ICD10, there needs to be a T23 - Trach Tube Present (TISS Item) for at least the first day
- if there is an Acquired Procedure of Tracheostomy creation (1.GJ.77), there has to be a T23 - Trach Tube Present (TISS Item) for at least the Px Date
- This is actually not so. Pt could have the ostomy with no tube in it. Definitely possible for the first one, less likely for the second, but still more likely than I would like to put a check in place. If you are OK with leaving the check out, we should still include a remnant of this discussion so we don't need to have it again. If you want to re-visit, please bring it to JALT or Task. Ttenbergen 16:51, 2022 February 10 (CST)
|
|
|
- if any trach-implying dxs are present then pt must have at least one code that indicates that they have a trach :
- trach-implying dxs
- code that indicates that they have a trach
- CCI - Tracheostomy creation (1.GJ.77)
- ICD10 - Tracheostomy, has one (Z93.0)
- TISS - T23 - Trach Tube Present (TISS Item)
Log
- 2022-02-10 - reviewed the proposed addition and have concerns, flagged for Julie
- 2019-04-08 - removed Tracheostomy care (retired code) from this query; changed how it is structured altogether to test new rule
- 2019-03-20 - previously this also required one of the above if "has one" was present, but that makes no sense, because one could be present without additional care requirements, so have taken that part out. Ttenbergen 12:45, 2019 March 20 (CDT)