2020-03 HSC COVID unit transition: Difference between revisions

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:
== How will we identify these patients in EPR ==
== How will we identify these patients in EPR ==
{{Discuss |  
{{Discuss |  
* What is not clear to me is how this will all look on our EPR reports,  I am assuming that we will now select WRSN3 for D5, and D5 will now be the D4 census.    I did a quick check on the EPR and currently the list of options includes WRSN3 (closed) as an option.  
* What is not clear to me is how this will all look on our EPR reports,  I am assuming that we will now select WRSN3 for D5, and D5 will now be the D4 census.    I did a quick check on the EPR and currently the list of options includes WRS3 (closed) as an option.  
}}
}}



Revision as of 16:32, 2020 March 18

  • This page is about the transition of collection units at HSC to accommodate the new COVID unit. Tina is using this as a brain dump for the moment, please don't edit for now.
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories

Background

  • Thursday March 1.20 – patients in HSC_D5 will be moving to HSC_WRS3 (753 Notre Dame (old Womens hospital))
  • Friday March 20.20 – patients in HSC D4 will be moving to HSC D5
  • Friday March 20-\.20 - D4 will be the new COVID-19 ward (#HSC_D4_COVID ?)

HSC_D4_COVID

  • Will we collect there? Exposure should be limited, but how much would we be able to get off charts, and would that still be useful? If we want to collect there, we will likely need a new Service/Location HSC_D4_COVID. If we are going to consider collecting the COVID ward at all (from EPR, no exposure), let’s not do it on paper, let’s do it on a laptop. That way the data we can get without exposure is at least available for intermediate analysis.
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories

How will we identify these patients in EPR

  • What is not clear to me is how this will all look on our EPR reports, I am assuming that we will now select WRSN3 for D5, and D5 will now be the D4 census. I did a quick check on the EPR and currently the list of options includes WRS3 (closed) as an option.
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories

Transition plan

We will not need to add _a, _b, _d anymore because including the laptop identifier in D_ID takes care of that.

We might be able to get data from EPR Report directly, but not immediately

  • Will we have two entries, one while on "old" unit with old serial sequence, and one on new? This would be cleanest from data perspective but would require re-entering some things. Tina might be able to duplicate these programmatically rather than collector re-entering manually.
  • Will we have one entry, started at old location and then ended at new location? The transition would be prolonged since a pt may have been on ward for long time, and might stay there for long time, especially with D5 population. Would we store this under old location name or new one? I don't think this is the way to go.... Ttenbergen 16:25, 2020 March 18 (CDT)


  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories
  • How will the D4 moving to D5 be handled? There should be a way to distinguish the old D5 from new D5 starting March20 (i.e. from D4) if we plan to collect actual location names? Maybe for the new D5, we assign - ‘D5_D4’ or’ D5_4’ or any suggestion ?? ? Then when reporting, it will be easy to combine D4 and the new D5 label. Using dates maybe difficult when trying to look at the summary counts of CFE – cannot get the actual counts quickly which I, Trish and Pagasa use a lot. .
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories


Reporting

Med reporting is by ward and combined. service location D5 before March 19 and WRS3N can be together.

Cross checks

  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories
  • Have not yet checked how this will impact CFE Data Integrity Checks. Pagasa, of the top of your head which would be impacted and how?
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories

Related articles

Related articles: