CCU Service Tracking: Difference between revisions

JMojica (talk | contribs)
m question
Line 24: Line 24:
* Julie said: More than one CCU or MICU scenario – we need a label or counter maybe under the integer (say 1- first case, 2- second case and so on) to be explicit. Or we can be implicit by just looking at the dates sequence but there will be a problem when DC change any previously entered date(s).   
* Julie said: More than one CCU or MICU scenario – we need a label or counter maybe under the integer (say 1- first case, 2- second case and so on) to be explicit. Or we can be implicit by just looking at the dates sequence but there will be a problem when DC change any previously entered date(s).   
** I don't understand the scenario you describe. Are you concerned about accidental, unintended edits by collectors? Either way, wouldn't the entry still be consistent even if the date were edited? Ttenbergen 14:54, 2015 May 27 (CDT)
** I don't understand the scenario you describe. Are you concerned about accidental, unintended edits by collectors? Either way, wouldn't the entry still be consistent even if the date were edited? Ttenbergen 14:54, 2015 May 27 (CDT)
** example is  CCU-MICU-CCU  or  MICU-CCU_MICU .  there is a  second CCU or MICU service which is real, how will it be differentiated with entry error/edit?
*** example is  CCU-MICU-CCU  or  MICU-CCU-MICU .  there is a  second CCU or MICU service which is real, how will it be differentiated with entry error/edit?
**** The later entry would have a different date. Do we need more than that? Ttenbergen 15:41, 2015 May 28 (CDT)


== does this still happen in CICU? ==
== does this still happen in CICU? ==