CCMDB Wiki

ClientGUID field: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
mNo edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:
This page is about the {{PAGENAME}} which identifies people, not the [[ClientVisitGUID]] which identifies admissions.  
This page is about the {{PAGENAME}} which identifies people, not the [[ClientVisitGUID]] which identifies admissions.  


Many patients don't have MB [[PHIN]]s so we generate [[PseudoPHIN]]s. I figured EPR must already solve this problem, and they use this field. We now get this as part of the [[Cognos]] data dump. If we set up the infrastructure to actually put this into patient records then we might be able to step away from the PseudoPhin process, and should have many fewer link errors.  
=== Background ===
Many patients don't have MB [[PHIN]]s so we generate [[PseudoPHIN]]s. EPR solves this by using a field ClientGUID, which we get as part of the [[Cognos EPR Report]]. If we set up the infrastructure to actually put this into patient records then we might be able to step away from the PseudoPhin process, and should have many fewer link errors.  
 
=== Concerns ===
==== Do we still get any data that is not from Cognos? ===
{{Discuss |
* Do collectors add all [[HSC IICU]] admissions via Cognos now that each IICU service admission is included on all HSC CC laptops? Or are there still exceptions. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:41, 2022 June 16 (CDT)
}}


{{DiscussTask |
{{DiscussTask |
* Do all collectors now add records from Cognos only or do some still do manual entry? Manual entry would break any processes we change to use this. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 09:20, 2022 March 24 (CDT)
* Aside from the odd correction entries, are there scenarios where records are routinely added other than via Cognos? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:41, 2022 June 16 (CDT)
** We still add records manually for our IICU admissions [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 07:58, 2022 April 28 (CDT)
*** What would it take to add these through Cognos? Are they being added manually because of how we don't assign them as per [[PatientFollow Project]]? If so, (a) do we really need to continue that exception? If we do, then it's probably a stable exception by now, and I might be able to update the query that lists IICU patients to always include them on each HSC CC laptop. That way those who _don't_ need to enter them would need to exclude them, but those who do need to enter them would be able to do so via Cognos. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 10:38, 2022 May 4 (CDT)
}}
}}


==== Merged records ([[John or Jane Doe patient]] who get identified, and other corrections) ====
Chastity confirmed there is a merge process for J Does who get identified. Confirming how this works, emailed Chastity 2022-06-16.
{{Todo  
{{Todo  
  | who = Tina  
  | who = Tina  
  | todo_added = 2022-04-13
  | todo_added = 2022-04-13
  | todo_action = 2022-04-13
  | todo_action = 2022-06-30
  | question =   
  | question =   
* ClientGUID is defined as '''unique identifier of the visit, seems to be used as prefix by later fields ending in *Chg''' - is that the same as unique  person  (PHIN and Pseudo PHIN) or it is only unique by visit per site?  For NON-MB, you still need to run Person_ID, correct? what will be the gain having the clientGUID, is there a running time advantage?  I am using Person_ID instead of PHIN/PseudoPHIN as unique patient identifier when providing individual patient data and when linking admissions - I need to be assured that the ClientGUID is really unique by patient.  --[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 10:20, 2022 March 24 (CDT) 
* Chastity confirmed there is a merge process for J Does who get identified. Confirming how this works, emailed Chastity 2022-06-16.
** I think you mean field Client'''Visit'''GUID. This is a new field and it actually identifies the patient, regardless of which province etc. The Non-MB issue is exactly what this field would solve. So, yes, unique by pt. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 12:10, 2022 March 24 (CDT)
* Asked Chastity if 3 month updates will be possible.
*** With this extra info, do you think this could replace the [[Person ID field]] so Pagasa would no longer need to generate those? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:12, 2022 April 7 (CDT)
}}
**** Discussed with Julie, and she agreed that this looks like. We'd keep PersonID in the short term until we feel comfortable with this. We may also keep this for the early years pre GUID. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:47, 2022 April 13 (CDT)}}
 
{{Todo
| who = Tina
| todo_added = 2022-04-13
| todo_action = 2022-04-13
| question = 
* ask Chastity what happens to John Doe's for ClientGUID
* Ask Chastity if 3 month updates will be possible [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:43, 2022 May 4 (CDT)
* change IICU listing in Cognos IICU so collectors can enter from Cognos. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:43, 2022 May 4 (CDT) }}  
 


== Implementation ==
== Implementation ==
Line 57: Line 53:


=== Data Processing improvements ===
=== Data Processing improvements ===
Having this field might further cut down on [[Pre-linking checks]], or at least on how many problems those find.  
Having this field might further cut down on [[Pre-linking checks]], or at least on how many problems those find. Or it might add to them, since merges could be messy.


Pagasa confirmed that we already see very few pre-linking checks that are actual errors, and that those are usually from [[PL_SamePHIN_Site_Diff_chart]] now: "''I have few errors common for HSC assigned a temporary chart which starts to 300 number but patient had already old chart number, another scenario old chart number but single admission nothing to compare with then have a current admission which is the correct one. ''"
Pagasa confirmed that we already see very few pre-linking checks that are actual errors, and that those are usually from [[PL_SamePHIN_Site_Diff_chart]] now: "''I have few errors common for HSC assigned a temporary chart which starts to 300 number but patient had already old chart number, another scenario old chart number but single admission nothing to compare with then have a current admission which is the correct one. ''"


=== Backfilling ===
=== Backfilling ===
I started discussion with DSS that we would like to eventually back-fill this data. So, for any MRN where we don't have a ClientGUID we would ask for it to be provided. Chances are ancient records won't have a ClientGUID; we could fill in our PHIN/PseudoPHIN for those.  
I started discussion with DSS that we would like to eventually back-fill this data. So, for any MRN where we don't have a ClientGUID we would ask for it to be provided. Ancient records won't have a ClientGUID; can we use their methods to create one or should we fill in our PHIN/PseudoPHIN for those?
{{Todo
| who = Tina
| todo_added = 2022-06-16
| todo_action = 2022-06-16
| question = 
* Discussing details with Chastity. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 11:41, 2022 June 16 (CDT)
}}


=== Log ===
=== Log ===
Retrieved from "https://ccmdb.kuality.ca/index.php?title=ClientGUID_field"