Property:DiscussQuestion

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

This is a property of type text.

Showing 20 pages using this property.
"
dev_CCMDB * disallow individual record delete on the patient lister built-in. * add a delete button that does the logical delete correctly on a per-patient basis. * this seems to be relatively low priority since we are not basing anything absolute on the logical delete feature, but needs to get done eventually to clean this up.  +
* If this button doesn't work as expected, please log it here. If nothing has been logged by Sep 30 this can be deleted. Ttenbergen 12:41, 2020 September 22 (CDT)   +
* Actually, does HSC CC use it? For them it would exclude the H6 patients if they sneak in somehow, but is it actually used, and if it's always used, should we just exclude those from the Cognos list altogether? ** Sorry Tina, I have no clue what you are asking here...We don't ever use the MINE MINE button, and I'm not sure what H6 has to do with anything?? *** If I remember right, initially some H6 patients were showing up in the CC list because CC docs follow them there? If so, these H6 might show up on HSC CC [[Cognos Admitter]]. We don't follow these, so I had set up the minemine button for HSC CC laptops to exclude these. Are you not getting any of those H6 pts cluttering your list without the minemine button? Ttenbergen 12:03, 2020 October 21 (CDT) **I have never used the minemine button. As far as I remember you told us that it wasn't quite set up and not to use it. I might have missed the instructions to start? --[[User:Jvelasco|Jvelasco]] 13:27, 2020 October 21 (CDT)   +
* Is it possible to also see the names of the patients in the View Excluded tab, so it’s easier to tell who has been excluded if we have multiple patients in there? What if I want to put one back and not the others? How do I find that one patient in a list of hospital numbers…--[[User:Jvelasco|Jvelasco]] 11:28, 2020 June 12 (CDT) ** That is actually not so straightfwd. I don't show the name, so would need to look it up based on chart, and that would turn it into a query, and from that we can't delete. I could build something like this, but would need a reason. Do we mistakenly exclude records often enough to make it worth it? If we do, I would be interested to know why, ie which part of our process has us excluding records that should not have been excluded? Ttenbergen 10:09, 2020 June 17 (CDT) * I haven't used this feature yet, but since it's there, people might want to exclude multiple entries for whatever reason. I just thought it would be easier to use if you could see names in there, if that was the case. In what scenario would we want to exclude one patient or multiple patients from the main admitter list? --[[User:Jvelasco|Jvelasco]] 12:30, 2020 June 18 (CDT)   +
2
* 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?   +, *Does that mean all those should be removed as [[s_dispo table]] entries? If we keep them in both linking will mess up. ** are you using the tmp entries in linking? I use the s_dispo when I do linking. I use the tmp entries to calculate time spent in each boarding loc and home ward. --[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 11:03, 2020 April 15 (CDT) *** No, not using tmp entries for linking, but if info is kept in tmp instead of new record added then the dispo entry in previous record or previous entry in next record may not match with the service location.   +, * April 2020 HSC_MICU will admitted both SICU and MICU physician Service patients that are either suspect or confirmed COVID patients. No suspect or positive covid will be admitted to HSC SICU. Though MICU is a close unit the SICU patient in this unit will be under the SICU attending service physician. Depending on skill set required, sometime may be a SICU nurse or just MICU nurse. The nurse bit we will not be able to track. We need to ask Randy and Bojan how they want this tracked in Database in terms of service occupancy. Put service Loc as HSC SICU and tag in TMP as boarding location? Julie would some of the logic applied to bed board apply to how we tag this.   +, ,
* April 2020 HSC_MICU will admitted both SICU and MICU physician Service patients that are either suspect or confirmed COVID patients. No suspect or positive covid will be admitted to HSC SICU. Though MICU is a close unit the SICU patient in this unit will be under the SICU attending service physician. Depending on skill set required, sometime may be a SICU nurse or just MICU nurse. The nurse bit we will not be able to track. We need to ask Randy and Bojan how they want this tracked in Database in terms of service occupancy. Put service Loc as HSC SICU and tag in TMP as boarding location? Julie would some of the logic applied to bed board apply to how we tag this.   +, *Does that mean all those should be removed as [[s_dispo table]] entries? If we keep them in both linking will mess up. ** are you using the tmp entries in linking? I use the s_dispo when I do linking. I use the tmp entries to calculate time spent in each boarding loc and home ward. --[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 11:03, 2020 April 15 (CDT) *** No, not using tmp entries for linking, but if info is kept in tmp instead of new record added then the dispo entry in previous record or previous entry in next record may not match with the service location.   +, what needs to change on laptops? [[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:00, 2020 May 12 (CDT)  +, ,
* Emailed Pagasa to change STB_E5a-880 one to service location STB_E5 so we can delete the STB_E5 entry. Ttenbergen 14:22, 2020 June 5 (CDT)   +, * The pages behind the following links should probably be deleted, since there are no entries for them; however, at least some of them are linked from other places, so those links need to be cleaned up as well...   +
*As in the first wave will we exclude those patients that are not under any of our medicine services? Ie. neurology and respiratory patients but we do include nephrology patients. ** I will pass this question on to Julie, since reporting needs should drive the answer to this. Ttenbergen 21:22, 2020 October 15 (CDT)   +
Will need to reconcile the following: * [[EMIP]] / [[ECIP]] * [[GRA ER use as borrow location]] / [[GRA EMIP]] * [[STB Medicine workload splitting]] / [[STB EMIP]] * [[HSC EMIP]]  +
A
z * Identified as something we should do to streamline data collection. I have made this page to document progress toward this import. Blood gas data is in DSM listing; need to compare to see if we can use it  +
1 * in the old schema it might have been one of the following: **[[Myocardial infarction]] (10200) **[[Unstable angina]] (15100) **[[Acute coronary insufficiency ]] (15200) **[[Witnessed Cardiac Arrest]] (10002) or [[Unwitnessed Cardiac Arrest]] (10001) * what should it be in the new schema? Someone marked it as [[Ischemic heart disease, acute NOS]] - is that the only one?  +
* To clarify this point, when does the 24 hour timeframe begin, from [[Accept DtTm]] or [[Arrive DtTm]] for patients admitted from ER? ** Answer to this also needs to go to [[Change to start collection at accept rather than arrive time]]. Ttenbergen 20:58, 2020 October 21 (CDT)   +
* Should we merge this with [[APACHE physiological variable collection]]? Med doesn't collect all of these, but those that are collected should probably be collected following the same instructions...   +
I wonder if "null" is actually intended here, or if it was supposed to be 0. Ttenbergen 14:44, 2017 January 8 (CST) *AaDO2 is null if there is no data for FIO2, PaO2 and PaCO2. However, no data was set to zero value instead of null. In addition, AaDO2 and the corresponding score are required only when FIO2 >= 50%, otherwise should be treated as null. (Similarly with PO2 score, it is required when FIO2 < 50% and otherwise should be treated as null. When FIO2 =0, both AaDO2 and its score and PO2 score should be null.) Are we setting null to zero to facilitate the programming calculation? Is it possible to differentiate null from valid zero in both L_LOG and created_variables_CC - will the work be big? In L_LOG, these are the FIO2, CO2, PO2 and SerCO2. 14:49, 2017 March 16 (CDT)  +
* Does this go away as well now as part of [[Change from Service Location to Service, Boarding Loc and Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry]]? If not going away, pls update. Ttenbergen 23:07, 2020 October 18 (CDT) ** should go away. maybe wait until the DC implement this in the new scheme and no more questions before we remove this article. *** OK, turning it into a Task item so we can confirm there that we are ready to do away with this. Ttenbergen 14:11, 2020 October 19 (CDT)   +
* This is now inconsistent with [[Task_Team_Meeting_-_Rolling_Agenda_and_Minutes_2020#ICU_Database_Task_Group_Meeting_-_February_12.2C_2020]] which was proposing a change for ECIP, but that change might also affect medicine. We need to update this page to make sure we write what we actually want. Ttenbergen 17:26, 2020 February 23 (CST)   +, this relates to [[Attribution of infections]] and we need to be sure to have it consistent.  +, * after [[Change from Service Location to Service, Boarding Loc and Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry]], and to be consistent with other things changing to include time cared for in ER, should this also start at [[Accept DtTm]] rather than [[Arrive DtTm]]?   +
Como Admit Acquired Primary Limits - this is part of that discussion - if we limit which admits will count as comos we need to review  +, 1 * that probably also ties in with [[Attribution of infections]] then?  +, * after [[Change from Service Location to Service, Boarding Loc and Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry]], and to be consistent with other things changing to include time cared for in ER, should this also start at [[Accept DtTm]] rather than [[Arrive DtTm]]?   +
* Thanks for the clarification, Michelle. I like your explanation and think it is clear. We still have the flow chart floating around on this wiki, though: [[:File:Patient Type Flowchart.gif]]; we should either get rid of it (preferred) or update and integrate it here (not preferred, since its contents would not be searchable). Ttenbergen 15:18, 2020 October 7 (CDT)   +
* I have noticed that the majority of COVID Pos patients have myalgias, fatigue, or malaise. Would it be possible to have a code for these three symptoms.[[User:Gens|Gens]] 12:27, 2020 October 16 (CDT)gens ** If we added dxs for those [[:Category:Symptom/Sign]], they would not need to be entered for COVID pts as per [[Template:ICD10 Guideline Signs Symptoms Test Results not needed when cause known]]. Ttenbergen 21:34, 2020 October 18 (CDT)   +, Hi Allan as per our discussion in the office can you help us determine how to code Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) a google search has determined that the proper ICD 10 code is D76.1 which we don't have. Thank you[[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 13:08, 2020 October 22 (CDT)  +
* I finally figured out how to ask this at task: I was worried that we might apply the delay at the data entry end and also at the reporting end (i.e. the delay might be included twice or not at all, so we need to phrase and then link this correctly so it's clear whether the delay is considered at collection or at reporting. Ttenbergen 21:37, 2020 August 27 (CDT)   +, *Is the following correct, then: <blockquote> A decided that an infection that is discovered '''within the first 48 hrs after admission''' should be coded as an [[Admit Diagnosis]], and an infection discovered after that as an [[Acquired Diagnosis]]. </blockquote>   +, When this is all settled, the details need to be integrated into [[Template: ICD10 Guideline Infection]], [[Lab and culture reports]], [[Infections in ICD10]]  +