Query NDC VAP no TISS: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|DIC_app=Centralized data front end.accdb | |DIC_app=Centralized data front end.accdb | ||
}} | }} | ||
Only patients who are ventilated in hospital can have a ''complication'' dx of [[Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP)]]. | Only patients who are ventilated in hospital can have a ''complication'' dx of [[Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP)]]. | ||
This integrity check | This integrity check would not take into account {{TISS w Nr | Non-invasive CPAP or BIPAP (TISS Item)}}. | ||
===Declined === | |||
* [[Pneumonia,_ventilator-associated_(VAP)#VAPs_on_medicine_wards]] mentions to use the same rules as for other [[Acquired Diagnoses]], ie the dx is acquired where it first manifests, so this check or rule no longer makes sense. If you are OK with this, please take this note out, else pls comment here. | |||
== Related articles == | == Related articles == |
Revision as of 16:54, 2020 December 2
Data Integrity Checks | |
Summary: | If a patient has a Acquired Diagnosis Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP) and no TISS28 items T18 - Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (TISS Item) (T18) then this is an error. |
Related: | VAP, Invasive Mechanical Ventilation (TISS Item), Spontaneous breathing via ETT or Trach (TISS Item) |
Firmness: | hard check |
Timing: | always |
App: | Centralized data front end.accdb |
Coding: | query NDC_VAP_no_TISS |
Uses L Problem table: | No |
Status: | declined |
Implementation Date: | not entered |
Backlogged: | true |
Only patients who are ventilated in hospital can have a complication dx of Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP).
This integrity check would not take into account T21 - Non-invasive CPAP or BIPAP (TISS Item).
Declined
- Pneumonia,_ventilator-associated_(VAP)#VAPs_on_medicine_wards mentions to use the same rules as for other Acquired Diagnoses, ie the dx is acquired where it first manifests, so this check or rule no longer makes sense. If you are OK with this, please take this note out, else pls comment here.