JALT Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2026

From CCMDB Wiki
Revision as of 15:52, 2 January 2026 by Ttenbergen (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


List of items to bring to JALT meeting

Add to this by adding the following to the article where the problem is documented: 

{{DiscussTask | JALT
* <question details>}}

(this will bring it to Task if not addressed at JALT)

or 

{{Discuss | JALT
* <question details>}}

(this will not bring it to Task) Toggle columns: Last modified

wiki page question Last modified
wiki page question Last modified
Check pre acute consistent JALT
  • Julie found data discrepancies and asked if we could review doing cross checks at least on records with the same Visit Admit DtTm for the following fields:
  • We reviewed a broader cross check proposal (link below) in some detail in a version available in the history of this page], so if we consider adding this we should confirm that none of those apply to any checks. Or we can ignore and just implement as soft-checks. Thoughts? Ttenbergen 12:28, 17 December 2025 (CST)
 2025-12-17 6:30:28 PM
Chronic Health Facility
  • Discussed this at JALT Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2025#JALT 2025-03-11 but I don't remember if we came to an answer or next step. Just found a note to add that we will also need to decide if any of these are in-patient locations. This would make them collectable as Pre-admit Inpatient Institution, and is relevant as per Pre-admit Inpatient Institution field#Data Use / Purpose.
  • are you referring to PCH's because they are not inpt locations or are you referring to chronic health facilities? Lisa Kaita 14:52, 25 June 2025 (CDT)
    		•  2025-11-28 1:43:16 PM
    Chronic Health Facility
  • 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)
    		•  2025-11-28 1:43:16 PM
    Chronic Health Facility 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
    		• 2025-11-28 1:43:16 PM
    Data Processor Portal JALT
  • We need a plan for how this gets done when Pagasa is away. Ttenbergen 12:29, 6 January 2026 (CST)
    		•  2026-01-06 6:31:16 PM
    Definition of a Medicine Program Admission JALT
  • heard that some beds at STB may have been "given" to Nephro, so we may be collecting them? Made me do a quick query to get rough numbers, sent off to JALT. . Is there anything we want to update in our definition based on this?Ttenbergen 18:55, 8 December 2025 (CST)
    		•  2025-12-09 12:55:39 AM
    Discharged to community JALT

    Just a placeholder for now because the idea of how we define dispo to community (or for that matter, re-admit Previous Location) in data came up re. things like Readmission to MedWard and others. We have the obvious "Home" but if someone is discharged to something like Dialysis, would that also count? How do we define? Ideally by a column in s_dispo table such as s_dispo.loc_type, but that one uses "non-patient" which it also uses for Deceased patients (should we just split that out?). There is probably even more to this. Likely Julie has more than one approach in reporting. This came up because we were looking to define this for LAU collection readmission data.

    • This is actually just as much regarding to admitted from community, so maybe this should just be renamed to "outpatient sites in s_dispo table"?
    		 2026-01-22 3:40:32 AM
    Dispo field 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)
    		 2026-01-27 5:10:08 PM
    Intended1stSrvc JALT
  • 2025-12-18 JALT - We may want to discuss the discrepancy of our naming and its implications with the recipients of our reports and possibly the team that reports similar out of EPR. Ttenbergen 14:44, 23 December 2025 (CST)
    		•  2026-01-29 4:54:48 PM
    Intended1stSrvc JALT
  • Can these entries only be at the same site as the record (eg would "Gra ICU" be a legit entry for a patient at HSC MICU)? If only same siet that may be a relevant cross-check.
    		•  2026-01-29 4:54:48 PM
    Patients residing in Manitoba with ambiguous MH Health coverage JALT
  • The page name isn't quite right, this concept is still evolving in documentation.
  • Some of these may be better off broken out as their own pages or templates and only indexed from here.
    		•  2025-08-14 5:06:29 PM
    Project NonTradLoc JALT
  • preliminary data review
    		•  2026-01-13 8:28:31 PM
    Project Overstay2
  • We have had patients admitted from the chronic care unit at DLC (they live there) the nurses check off PCH for where they reside (on DPST), for Pre acute living situation field we enter Chronic Health Facility and for dispo we enter Deer Lodge, should we be considering this a PCH? as per instructions on DPST they do not continue the DPST form Lisa Kaita 12:35, 24 November 2025 (CST)
  • yes that answers my question, for the most part we can figure it out through the notes, lets leave collection as is. If you are ok with this lets take it off the JALT list Lisa Kaita 09:06, 17 December 2025 (CST)
  • Agreed it doesn't need to be on JALT. I will keep it around as a comment because it's part of the whole Chronic Health Facility issue. Ttenbergen 11:44, 17 December 2025 (CST)
    		•  2025-12-17 5:44:01 PM
    Query check tmp AHC JALT
  • if there is referral sent there must be a referral received entry and a consult dealt with entry Lisa Kaita 11:31, 7 August 2025 (CDT)
    • pt could die in between? consult could go missing? In a way those would be really the ones we would want to know about, no? I suppose we could make it a soft check... Ttenbergen 16:26, 19 August 2025 (CDT)
    • this almost sounds like the opposite of how I would have understood the current instructions. I would have thought those to mean to only enter "consult received" if there was no good data for consult sent. How do we actually want to use this?
      • late answer: how did Julie analyze this? at the time all fields were mandatory, unless there was no consult, current status, collect consult sent and if no data found for this then use consult received. Lisa Kaita 12:59, 13 January 2026 (CST)
      • I don't know, flagging for Julie and putting this on the JALT agenda; collection is still going, so we may still want to implement this. Ttenbergen 14:58, 13 January 2026 (CST)
    		•  2026-01-13 8:58:25 PM
    Selkirk Mental Health Centre 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.
    		•  2025-12-17 6:03:11 PM
    Selkirk Mental Health Centre 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.
    		•  2025-12-17 6:03:11 PM
    Sending Patients JALT
  • Can we again revisit the pros and cons of sending only when working on site against sending from home? There is always a need of updated data and I do not want to be emailing everyone to send when data are needed. This can be solved by sending in all days the collector works regardless onsite or from home during the assigned time slots. In addition, I think this practice of submitting data frequently will also mean lesser new data on the laptop if unfortunate incident happens on the laptop and there is a need to re-enter data again. Do we still experience problem in sending when we set up the sending time schedule by site? --JMojica 16:37, 2 December 2025 (CST)
    • There might be ways to make sending faster or more reliable. This would take a fair bit of analysis and testing.
    One reason I have not pursued this is the prospect of re-platforming. A cloud based system would eliminate sending; it might cause new process tangles but that's a different topic. So it would be good to have an idea of the time horizon for this to decide if the work to mitigate the errors and reduce sending restrictions is worth it.
    It might be possible to find a compromise that re-balances risk and benefit. Ttenbergen 01:19, 3 December 2025 (CST)
    • I heard nothing from the collectors about errors in sending since we started this new schedule. If they work from home, can we allow them to send? They can send early or after 04:30 PM. PTorres 14:27, 3 December 2025 (CST)
      • Open to it. If things work fine now, changing process may break them again. Ttenbergen 11:50, 17 December 2025 (CST)
    		 2025-12-17 5:50:08 PM
    Service tmp post-send consistency checks
  • As discussed at JALT Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2025#JALT 2025-11-27: Do we need any post-send, cross-record checks relating to Service tmp entry? Ttenbergen 16:44, 27 November 2025 (CST)
    		•  2025-11-27 10:44:27 PM
    Service/Location field
  • 2025-12-18 JALT - the notes about 2025-05 Revision of concept around ICUotherService / Intended1stSrvc also talked about Service/Location being made consistent with Boarding Loc; did we decide to proceed with this? The change to s_dispo table would be easy, but it would also apply to eg Previous Location, and any cross-checks or report using string literals to match would be affected, so testing the impact would be harder. Ttenbergen 02:42, 24 December 2025 (CST)
    		•  2025-12-24 8:46:05 AM
    Standard data cleaning process
  • While discussing Visit Admit DtTm differences within same admission at JALT Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2025#JALT 2025-03-11 I realized we don't have any part of your "cleaning" process documented. We should, even if it is a rudimentary notice of the SAS files you use and what you check for. Ttenbergen 21:51, 11 March 2025 (CDT)
  • If there is linking beyond Populate linking pairs, or if you use a different linkage, we need to document that as well; do you? Ttenbergen 21:51, 11 March 2025 (CDT)
    		•  2025-03-12 2:51:43 AM
    STB Medicine Collection Guide There was a discussion about the beds that had been "handed to" them... what was the outcome, should it go here?
  • still discussing at JALT AG will speak with nephro and NH about what to do going forward Lisa Kaita 10:43, 6 January 2026 (CST)
    		•  2026-01-06 4:43:51 PM


    _

    _


    JALT 2025-12-18 (Copied for continuity, delete once the first new minutes for the year are in here)

    • Present: Tina, Julie, Jen, Lisa, Allan
    • Minutes by: Allan

    1. 2025-05 Revision of concept around ICUotherService / Intended1stSrvc]] - We finalized decisions relating to concepts around service, location and ICU reporting.

    • We agreed that the options for the dropdown listings should all be the same for Boarding Loc, Service/Location, and the new field Intended1stSrvc, and that these will be the same as those currently used for Boarding Loc, i.e: HSC-MICU, HSC-SICU, HSC-IICU, STB-MICU, STB-CICU, STB-ACCU and GH-CC
    • We recognize that these will then be different from the "official" ADT services listings provided to us in Cognos2

    2. Definition of a Medicine Program Admission - There was extensive discussion about ward patients on non-GIM services, particularly Nephro, Neuro, Resp

    • This is very confusing for many reasons, including:
      • Some of these patients are physically on Medicine wards, but others are not
      • Nephro, Neuro and Resp have their own wards, in some hospitals
      • Some of these patients might be on a GIM ward and cared for by GIM housestaff but the official attending is not GIM (e.g. Nephro)
      • Other of these patients might be on a GIM ward cared for as non-teaching by a subspecialty attending (e.g. Nephro) -- but as we don't know about this, they are included in GIM ward reporting by Julie
      • The mixture of all these alternatives change over time
      • The Medicine Database is not informed and therefore not kept up to date on all of this confusion
    • The Service tmp entry from ADT via Cognos provides some clarity on the actual service caring for each patient, though Julie has found that for ward patients this is incorrect in a minority of cases (probably correct in >90%)
    • Some of these issues relate to data that might be useful for the work being done by Dan & Tina on moving patients through the system
    • We are unsure how much of such detailed, cumulative data, about all this is desired by the administrative heads of the Department of Medicine and some of the Sections
      • although per Julie and Lisa, Nick H. did request that we collect on the new Nephrology Transplant patients on B2 at HSC
    • ACCORDINGLY -- given all this confusion, Allan has sent an email to the leadership of: Department, GIM, Neuro, Nephro, Resp, along with Dan --- proposing that a meeting get set up to:
      • First -- understand the wishes of those stakeholders for cumulative data on their various ward patients
      • Second -- Figure out how we could provide such reporting
      • Third -- come back to the stakeholders to explain what ongoing information would be needed for us to provide that reporting (e.g. being kept appraised of the agreements between GIM and the subspecialties about use of GIM ward beds).
    • this is not only about what data they want, but also about how we would find out which patients we should collect
    • it might need to include a conversation about why the data is wrong in 10% of cases

    Ttenbergen 22:17, 18 December 2025 (CST)

    • SMW


    • Cargo


    • Categories

    Previous

    For earlier minutes see JALT Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2025

    Retrieved from "https://ccmdb.kuality.ca/index.php?title=JALT_Meeting_-_Rolling_Agenda_and_Minutes_2026&oldid=168311"