Check pre acute consistent: Difference between revisions
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
The collector will receive an escapable warning if: | The collector will receive an escapable warning if: | ||
* {{Discussion}} If what? | * {{Discussion}} If what? | ||
== Remaining questions == | |||
{{Discussion}} There was a previous attempt to address some of this in [[Care levels in the community]]; this page and it need to be consistent, and consistently linked from the relevant field definitions. If we can get it short enough we might make a template to apply the instructions to each of the field pages. | {{Discussion}} There was a previous attempt to address some of this in [[Care levels in the community]]; this page and it need to be consistent, and consistently linked from the relevant field definitions. If we can get it short enough we might make a template to apply the instructions to each of the field pages. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
{{Discussion}} How does [[Chronic Health Facility]] fit into this? | {{Discussion}} How does [[Chronic Health Facility]] fit into this? | ||
{{Discussion}} There was talk about compating [[Postal Code]]s to known PCH Postal Codes. Since these might include other buildings at the same site that are not PCHs, this check can at best be a soft check. Please add the list of these postal codes here. | |||
=== Background === | === Background === | ||
Revision as of 21:22, 15 October 2018
| Data Integrity Checks | |
| Summary: | consistency of Pre acute living situation, Dispo, Postal Code and Previous Location |
| Related: | [[Pre acute living situation, Dispo, Postal Code, Previous Location]] |
| Firmness: | soft check |
| Timing: | complete |
| App: | CCMDB.mdb |
| Coding: | query check pre acute consistent |
| Uses L Problem table: | not relevant for this app |
| Status: | needs review |
| Implementation Date: | |
| Backlogged: | true |
The collector will receive an escapable warning if:
- Template:Discussion If what?
Remaining questions
Template:Discussion There was a previous attempt to address some of this in Care levels in the community; this page and it need to be consistent, and consistently linked from the relevant field definitions. If we can get it short enough we might make a template to apply the instructions to each of the field pages.
Template:Discussion There are instructions relating to some of the pages in Category:Awaiting/delayed transfer, consistency with this page needs to be confirmed.
Template:Discussion How does Chronic Health Facility fit into this?
Template:Discussion There was talk about compating Postal Codes to known PCH Postal Codes. Since these might include other buildings at the same site that are not PCHs, this check can at best be a soft check. Please add the list of these postal codes here.
Background
Julie found cases where the pre acute living situation for direct admits are not consistent with Previous Location and/or Dispo. We want the DC to be aware that the pre acute living situation has a relationship with the Previous Location or Dispospecifically for PCH cases.
Examples:
- pre acute living situation = assisted living; Previous Location = Winnipeg PCH
- pre acute living situation = supportive home; Previous Location = St Amant
I rely on the combination of pre acute living situation, Previous Location, Postal Code and Dispo fields to identified new or already PCH residents prior to admission. Data collectors must understand that Assisted Living and Supportive Housing are not PCH and must be entered as simply HOME as confirmed by Dr Roberts.
Related articles
| Related articles: |