Requested CCMDB changes for the next version: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 These requested changes can not be processed until the questions about them have been answered. Wherever possible the discussion should conclude in the home article of the topic. If a topic has no home article, it can be listed here.
-=== Counting Date Tracker ===
+=== Keeping track of what has been reviewed ===
-One of the reasons some people keep paper is that they track on paper when they have last looked at labs etc so they know where to count from next time they review the chart. At some locations people put ticks in the charts to note how far they have collected, but at other locations that isn't done. I am not sure why...
+One of the reasons some people keep paper is that they track on paper when they have last looked at labs etc so they know where to count from next time they review the chart. This is not a problem at SBGH where data can be collected from the EPR after discharge since the chart is always available.
+Is there a way to facilitate this in CCMDB.mdb that would add the least manual entry overhead for the greatest facilitation and paper reduction?
+==== Option 1 - "last collected" dates ====
 I have had a suggestion that adding date/time fields to the program that would set to "now" upon double-clicking them would mean one more thing tracked in the .mdb rather than on paper. These fields would not be mandatory and they would not be sent in, they would just be for your own use.
 Suggested date/times were:
@@ Line 55: / Line 58: @@
 *LAST COUNTED PHARM
 *CHART REVIEWED
+This seems the simplest option to add to CCMDB.mdb, but it may not be much use to those who "tick" or flowsheet at this time.
+* thoughts?
+==== Option 2 - electronic flowsheet ====
+We could make sheets in ccmdb.mdb that have columns for dates and lines for e.g. the drug or test in question.
+* Any opinions? This is the most comprehensive, but I worry that this will cause a lot of overhead entering.
+==== Option 3 - ticks in charts ====
+Some locations (e.g. MWaschuk@Grace) put ticks in the charts up to how far they have collected. Other locations tell me that sometimes whole pages of records are missing. Would going through the chart chronologically and relying on ticks miss such data loss?
+Also, where "ticks" are used, what are people using for ticks? If we are going to have coverage across sites this should at least be consistent. Anyone else using purple yet? We could use purple ticks? Or some quick-drawn symbol, maybe. A tick seems like something that could arrive by accident...
+* thoughts? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:37, 25 October 2010 (CDT)
-==== Usefulness? ====
-{{Discussion}}
-* Would your location use this or do you put checks on charts? Or, do you have an entirely different way you keep track of this?
-**I might use this but I put ticks in the chart so I know which labs I have counted.--[[User:MWaschuk|MWaschuk]] 17:43, 9 June 2010 (CDT)
-** We would not use this at STB because we utilize electronic chart to count labs at the end of a patient stay.  --[[User:LKolesar|LKolesar]] 14:56, 10 June 2010 (CDT)
-*** Laura, this is not just for Labs, do you get the other fields out of the electronic chart as well? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:37, 22 October 2010 (CDT)
-==== Any problems/disadvantages implementing this? ====
-{{Discussion}}
 Trish (or anyone): Can you see any concerns if this were implemented? Would we automate something that could be done easier, or maybe doesn't need to be done at all? Any thoughts along that line? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 15:37, 22 October 2010 (CDT)