Acquired Diagnosis / Complication: Difference between revisions
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
{{discussion}} | {{discussion}} | ||
Currently the instructions are to collect acquireds in order of occurrence. Is this significant, i.e. do we use "first acquired" for anything meaningful, or do we draw inferences based on the order in which they occur? I would like to propose a change: I could simply sort them by whether they are "significant" or not, and send as many of the significant ones as possible. Especially Trish and Julie, do you think this would work? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 18:39, 26 July 2011 (CDT) | Currently the instructions are to collect acquireds in order of occurrence. Is this significant, i.e. do we use "first acquired" for anything meaningful, or do we draw inferences based on the order in which they occur? I would like to propose a change: I could simply sort them by whether they are "significant" or not, and send as many of the significant ones as possible. Especially Trish and Julie, do you think this would work? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 18:39, 26 July 2011 (CDT) | ||
**We collect complications in order of occurrence but for long stay patients who develope more significant complications after we have maxxed out our 9, we will change some minor ones in order to capture the significant ones.--[[User:CMarks|CMarks]] 12:15, 5 August 2011 (CDT) | |||
== Maximum Number of Acquired Diagnoses == | == Maximum Number of Acquired Diagnoses == | ||