| | Question | Modification date"Modification date" is a predefined property that corresponds to the date of the last modification of a subject and is provided by Semantic MediaWiki. |
|---|
| Chronic Health Facility |
- review, that might need to be consolidated with this page as well.
We have discussed lately that we might want to become more nuanced about some chronic care locations (Deer Lodge (DLC) and Riverview). I have removed the details from the above linked fields and consolidated here. Once this page is cleaned up this discussion entry can be removed.
- Discussed at
- These should be made consistent with [[Template:PCH Riverview Deer Lodge (DLC)]] and should probably use that template to enforce consistent use. Ttenbergen 14:23, 2024 October 16 (CDT)
- and I have lost track of the details Ttenbergen 10:45, 2024 November 1 (CDT)
- There might be an easy way out of this question. We now only have one awaiting code; if waiting for any of them qualifies for this code then we may not need to know about the level of care. But then again, some of those sites also have acute/LAU type settings so we may need to figure this out after all...Ttenbergen 20:27, 2024 December 11 (CST)
- that template does not exist or I can't find it Lisa Kaita 14:56, 25 June 2025 (CDT)
- This issue raised a problem with medicine data recently, and we will review again if this needs to be coded more granular after all,
- dicussed at JALT June 25, 2025: while Bojan would like this it is not possible to keep track of unit changes and not always easy to tell which unit they arrive from so leave a Riverview and Deer Lodge (DLC), with the exception of the PCH units in each facility.Lisa Kaita 14:52, 25 June 2025 (CDT)
| 28 November 2025 13:43:16 |
| Decubitus Stage not indicated Details |
- This instruction is taken from old dx Decubitus (pressure) ulcer, stage not indicated; since we will now have a series of codes for suspected deep tissue injury, we need to change this, but what should be here, and what should move into Template:Decubitus Deep Tissue Damage Details? Ttenbergen 15:29, 30 June 2025 (CDT)
- This page should remain the same, deep tissue injury is really considered to be a different way to stage/document decubitus ulcers An unstageable ulcer is still used in documentation and grading of decubitus ulcers Lisa Kaita 20:23, 7 October 2025 (CDT)
| 8 October 2025 01:25:23 |
| Dispo field | If this is actually done then why don't we just make the nursing stations available? We already have s_dispo table entries for them. 35 entries since 2016, 6 in the last 12 months. Are there other things for which this entry is used? Checked for reasons for this decision but they don't appear documented Ttenbergen 19:42, 13 March 2025 (CDT)
JALT
I thought we had decided at JALT to collect this as presented by EPR... do I remember this wrong? I had already added it in CCMDB.accdb Change Log 2025#2025-03-11-1. Ttenbergen 22:52, 11 March 2025 (CDT)
- Yes, I saw that, come to think of it I don't think we decided, not in my notes, but we can use it and I will change the wiki instructions Lisa Kaita 11:25, 13 March 2025 (CDT)
- If we are going to collect this detail for dispo, should we consider whether or not to also look at SH in preadmit living situation?, currently lumped with community facility with support. Lisa Kaita 14:45, 16 April 2025 (CDT)
- The entry name includes "TRSF" - is the entry for the previous location equivalent in EPR? Ttenbergen 23:30, 16 April 2025 (CDT)
- no because the previous location would usually be <site>_ER Lisa Kaita 09:53, 28 May 2025 (CDT)
- Sorry, I should have asked about "pre-hospital location in ADT". Ttenbergen 16:21, 28 May 2025 (CDT)
That more detailed info included things like HSC Lennox Bell; we discussed whether or not we need to document the details of this. If so, the following is likely a starting point:
- Home
- Home with support
- Institution NOS
- TRSF Group/Supportive housing
- TRSF to Correctional Facility
- any Hospices
- GH-Transitional care
- HSC - Transitional care
- Misericordia - Transitional care
- STB - Transitional care
- VIC - Transitional care
- HSC Lennox Bell
- Manitoba Adolescent Treatment Center - unknown/other
- what is this about again? we already collect these with the exception of the transitional care units, which don't exist, at GH, HSC, SBGH and VIC, but there is a TCU at Miseri and DLC Lisa Kaita 21:18, 6 September 2025 (CDT)
- we discussed whether we should shift to EPR's "TRSF to Residential Care" and decided not to because our data is more granular. But we should be able to compare to their TRSF, so should understand which of our data would compare to theirs, and how. I think the above is a list of what we have in dispo, so which of those correspond do what listing in EPR? Ttenbergen 10:31, 8 September 2025 (CDT)
- Are there others? I think H6...
JALT Task
- Home O2 return
- Those that have home O2 prior to admission, and go home with O2, do we use Home with support services everytime? Or is it only during the first time they get set up with home O2 service?
Allyson Alcudia 14:40, 12 December 2025 (CST)
JALT Task
- Private Nursing Service
- does this include patients who are discharged home with private nursing service? (steph)
- With "this" do you mean "TRSF Group/Supportive housing"? I would not have thought so. If you mean "Home with Support Services", good question. How would HIS use it (aside from getting it wrong at times)? We should probably stick with their definition for consistency. Convince me otherwise. Julie also might have thoughts on how we would use this entry, will flag for her. Ttenbergen 01:02, 24 October 2025 (CDT)
- I think this would be belong under home with support services...Lisa Kaita 14:03, 14 November 2025 (CST)
JALT Task
- HSC Virtual Ward
- .... but do the virtual wards fall under transfer to Group/Supportive housing? Lisa Kaita 14:03, 14 November 2025 (CST)
- is there more than on VW now? Ttenbergen 22:07, 18 December 2025 (CST)
| 19 December 2025 04:07:48 |
| Selkirk Mental Health Centre |
I am unclear with these instructions, if indirect code as applicable? if we are using chronic care facility, like we do for Riverview and Deer Lodge (DLC), we have Riverview as an option for if they arrive as a direct or indirect, but now Deer Lodge (DLC) and Selkirk mental health are not an option, shouldn't we be treating these all the same? There is a question on the Chronic Health Facility Lisa Kaita 17:50, 16 June 2025 (CDT)
- I agree we should treat them the same. Also, there is now Eden Mental Health Centre in Winkler, which is listed together with Selkirk on the File:GRA ALC Form.pdf. Selkirk groups together with PCHs when reported, so to treat Eden similar to Selkirk in the absence of separate record, the most consistent coding would be "Manitoba PCH outside of Winnipeg". That is probably not where a user of our data would expect to find this. Should we consider any of the residential addiction treatment centres the same way (Bruce Oake Recovery Centre, Native Addictions Council of Manitoba, ...)?
JALT - Mental Health Facility Coding vs PCH
- currently aggregated as "PCH" because S dispo.loc type is PCH. That seems wrong. Should it be changed to “unknown/other” or to a new category “Mental Health”? And should we add Eden Mental Health Centre as well? Ttenbergen 16:21, 29 October 2025 (CDT)
- Julie reviewed, only 6 cases in our data (are we coding this consistently?). Julie emailed OK with “unknown/other”, but also raised how Pre acute living situation should be coded.
JALT - Mental Health Facilities in Addition to Selkirk
- Should we add Eden Mental Health Centre as well? Are there others, like addiction treatment facilities (eg Bruce Oake), that we should code either as a group or individually?
- If we don't think this information is needed, should we also de-list our entry for Selkirk for consistency? Another option is to rename the selkirk entry and use it as an aggregate location going fwd.
| 17 December 2025 18:03:11 |
| Sex field |
I just came across an incomplete record (from S9 laptop) that has a sex entry "Undiff". Our dropdown doesn't contain this so this likely came from Cognos. If this is now being coded in EPR, and considering that this would affect the "biological sex" we use in defining this, should we introduce this as an option? If we do not want to introduce this as an option, do our cross checks catch this? They might not, since this could not have been entered manually. Ttenbergen 00:16, 12 November 2025 (CST)
| 12 November 2025 06:16:35 |