Check Isolation Px vs Isolation Dx: Difference between revisions

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
LBilesky (talk | contribs)
CCMDB_legit, approved
451 edits
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Any patient with a diagnosis worth of isolation should likely have an isolation task, and vice versa. This is an old check that was requested in [[! Automated Data Integrity Checks]].
Theoretically [[Isolation-Task | isolation tasks]] should correspond to [[:Category:Diagnosis Coding|coded diagnoses]] requiring isolation. If so, we might be able to implement a [[:Category:Data Integrity Checks | data integrity check]] for this.  
Because all information required this check should be done in [[CCMDB.mdb]] rather than in [[CCMDB Cleaner.mdb]].  


*Isolation DX and TASK inconsistent
== Considerations ==
*not sure what codes are included here that [[:Category: Cleaner.mdb Data Integrity Checks | CCMDB Data Cleaner.mdb]] check?
=== Truth vs. consistency ==
**99-22
Do we actually want to know that '''isolation happened''' or that it should have. If a diagnosis that should have had isolation happened and isolation was not put in place, we would ''want'' it to be not coded, right? If all we want is to have isolation coded for every dx that needs it, then maybe we don't need to code it at all and should simply consider all with those dxs as isolation.
**99-24
 
**99-48
=== limited # of dxs can be coded ==
We can only code a limited number of dxs, so the dx requiring isolation may not be coded. We could suspend the check if either admit or acquired fields are full.
 
== Definition of the check ==
In an ideal world, patients with the following diagnoses would be isolated and therefore have an isolation task:
*99-22
*99-24
*99-48
*'''are there others?''' Ttenbergen 12:48, 2012 November 7 (EST){{discussion}}
=== include 84-48 & 85-48? ===
**??84-48 & 85-48  - Trish to check with Dr. Kumar.   
**??84-48 & 85-48  - Trish to check with Dr. Kumar.   
***collectors are not certain if colonized or just site infection.
***collectors are not certain if colonized or just site infection.
**** not sure what this means. if his is relating to how collection is supposed to happen than this is probably not the place to discuss it...Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST){{discussion}}
**** not sure what this means. if his is relating to how collection is supposed to happen than this is probably not the place to discuss it...Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST){{discussion}}


== Full DX column not required?==
{{discussion}}
*If the Isolations code is present then full dx column is not needed in the output.
*If the Isolations code is present then full dx column is not needed in the output.
[[User:PTorres|PTorres]] 17:07, 21 October 2008 (CDT)
[[User:PTorres|PTorres]] 17:07, 21 October 2008 (CDT)
** what does this mean? Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST){{discussion}}
** what does this mean? Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST){{discussion}}
== does this check make sense? ==
Is it reasonable to check this? It only is if we expect that task and dx should always match, in which case, what is the point of collecting this? Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST)
--Patients are put on isolation if they are suspects for MRSA etc. but they may come back negative so you cannot assume if they are on isolation that they have a diagnosis requiring isolation.Lois


== Implementation ==
== Implementation ==
suspect this is not implemented right now, if we want it implemented it needs to go into [[Requested Changes]]. Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST)
suspect this is not implemented right now, if we want it implemented it needs to go into [[Requested Changes]]. Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST) {{Potential change}}


[[Category: Cleaner.mdb Data Integrity Checks]]
[[Category:CCMDB Data Integrity Checks]]
[[Category:CCMDB Data Integrity Checks]]
[[Category:Task Elements]]
[[Category:Task Elements]]

Revision as of 12:48, 7 November 2012

Theoretically isolation tasks should correspond to coded diagnoses requiring isolation. If so, we might be able to implement a data integrity check for this. Because all information required this check should be done in CCMDB.mdb rather than in CCMDB Cleaner.mdb.

Considerations

= Truth vs. consistency

Do we actually want to know that isolation happened or that it should have. If a diagnosis that should have had isolation happened and isolation was not put in place, we would want it to be not coded, right? If all we want is to have isolation coded for every dx that needs it, then maybe we don't need to code it at all and should simply consider all with those dxs as isolation.

= limited # of dxs can be coded

We can only code a limited number of dxs, so the dx requiring isolation may not be coded. We could suspend the check if either admit or acquired fields are full.

Definition of the check

In an ideal world, patients with the following diagnoses would be isolated and therefore have an isolation task:

include 84-48 & 85-48?

    • ??84-48 & 85-48 - Trish to check with Dr. Kumar.
      • collectors are not certain if colonized or just site infection.
        • not sure what this means. if his is relating to how collection is supposed to happen than this is probably not the place to discuss it...Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST)Template:Discussion

Full DX column not required?

Template:Discussion

  • If the Isolations code is present then full dx column is not needed in the output.

PTorres 17:07, 21 October 2008 (CDT)

Implementation

suspect this is not implemented right now, if we want it implemented it needs to go into Requested Changes. Ttenbergen 16:47, 2012 November 5 (EST) Template:Potential change

Retrieved from "https://ccmdb.kuality.ca/index.php?title=Check_Isolation_Px_vs_Isolation_Dx&oldid=30291"