Patient copier button

We have at times thought about adding functionality to CCMBD.mdb to copy some patient information into a new record.

We hear repeatedly about patients being shuffled back and forth between units, or being re-admitted after very short absences from the unit. Sometimes a record for the patient is still on CCMDB from the previous admission. During a recent meeting we discussed the possibility of having a button in the patient record. When that button is pushed, a new patient entry would be generated that would copy a subset of the information of the existing record. The collector would be prompted for a Serial number for the new record.

How useful would this be?

Poll to collectors says that they would use this somewhere between 1x/week and 1x/month.

Assuming it takes 5 minutes to re-enter this data manually and only 1 with this tool, a savings of 4 minutes, and 20 data collectors encountering this on average 2x/month, this would add up to >2.6hrs a month.

Can't encourage hoarding...

We can't keep data for discharged patients on the laptops too long for PHIA reasons (we are allowed only "current data"). This tool would encourage keeping older data. So, we would need to add a limit. Proposal: Don't allow sending if there are records with RecordStatus "sent" whose discharge date is more than a week ago.

What would be the right things to copy?

Keeping in mind that collectors would certainly have to verify copied information to make sure it is still true on the new admission (not to make sure it copied right...), please add if I have missed any, and comment if you think any are problematic if they were copied.

• Names, Chart, PHIN, DOB, Province, Sex
• Postal Code
• discharge date + 5 min to Admit date? Could make that optional where it asks if you want to do this...
• put previous location into admit from? Again, could make this optional...
• comorbids?
  • Con mentioned that they could change Ttenbergen 17:51, 2016 December 1 (CST)
• for medicine: tasks? seems like they would not usually change...Template:Discussion
  • This may not be the case. For example a patient is admitted to Hobs with severe sepsis and unable to perform any of his ADL and has a foley in situ. His ADL would be all major assist.He is then transferred to A4 two weeks later and only requires a minimal assist with his bath, is able to be up and about on the ward independently and his foley had been removed in Hobs. On admission to A4 his ADL in completely different plus he requires far less nursing time for his care.--CMarks 12:52, 2015 September 30 (CDT)
    • there would be exceptions like that for many fields. do you think that more often than not ADLs stay same? Or, is the probability such that copying them would be likely to increase errors more than it would ease collection? Ttenbergen 16:50, 2015 October 2 (CDT)
  • as a data collector on a very busy renal ward, with lots of diabetic dialysis patients, the most important things to copy (for me) would be the demographics (dispo page), and the comorbids. The comorbids shouldn't change much. (You may have to add more comorbids to any subseqent patient profiles, but you wouldn't really be taking any away.) My diabetic renal patients can have as many as two dozen comorbids. Also, I have the situation of multiple admits with the same patient occurring very frequently. This past Tuesday alone, I had four sets of duplicate patients. As well, when you are entering as many as two dozen comorbids on just one profile, it takes a lot longer than five minutes per profile. In summery, this would be such a helpful tool to be able to use. I would be one happy data collector if this could be set up. DPageNewton 08:18, 2019 August 1 (CDT)

Log

• discussed again as part of PatientFollow Project
  • Copier button to do following:
    • get new Serial
    • run L_Log_copier query with that Serial
    • run L_ICD10_copier query with that Serial

• email from Deb 2019-07-30, referred her to this page

• Task Team Meeting Discussion and Decision 2018-09-11
  • Pros: would save ~5 min per patient to re-enter.
  • Cons: would need to be analyzed and defined before implementation and would have low priority for implementation, and would risk perpetuating inaccuracies.
  • We decided that on a balance we are better off without this feature. Ttenbergen 11:01, 2018 September 11 (CDT)

• We discussed today the possibility of copying diagnoses and putting them as "tentative" instead of admit or acquired. That would introduce other complexity, eg we would need to be sure that won't cause Julie or Pagasa problems. Overall not as simple as it initally seems. Maybe we need to step back and say only copying demographics? Ttenbergen 17:51, 2016 December 1 (CST)