Query check CCI TISS Intubation vs Intubated: Difference between revisions

From CCMDB Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
Line 31: Line 31:
# if previous date has {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} and today date has {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} and {{TISS w Nr |Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)}} are marked then today date of {{TISS w Nr |Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)}} or {{TISS w Nr | Planned extubation (TISS Item)}} should be marked
# if previous date has {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} and today date has {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} and {{TISS w Nr |Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)}} are marked then today date of {{TISS w Nr |Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)}} or {{TISS w Nr | Planned extubation (TISS Item)}} should be marked
#* not necessarily, could have been done in OR or elsewhere
#* not necessarily, could have been done in OR or elsewhere
==Julie requested==
Moved here from ''Query TISS Errors ETT consistent'' which turned out to be a duplicate of this same issue.
=== extubate only when tube present ===
{{TISS w Nr | Planned extubation (TISS Item)}} or {{TISS w Nr | Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)}} can only be marked when {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} is marked in same day.
=== new tube inserted ===
When {{TISS w Nr | Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)}}(T40) is marked, the {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}}(T22) must also be marked in same day.
=== extubate only when new tube inserted ===
{{TISS w Nr | Planned extubation (TISS Item)}} or {{TISS w Nr | Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)}} can only be marked when both 1) {{TISS w Nr | Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)}} is marked on same day '''and''' 2) {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} is marked in previous day.
{{TISS w Nr | Planned extubation (TISS Item)}} or {{TISS w Nr | Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)}} can only be marked when both 1) {{TISS w Nr | Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)}} is marked on same day '''and''' 2) {{TISS w Nr | ETT Present (TISS Item)}} is not marked the next day.
{{DiscussTask | 1
* A patient might arrive intubated, so there would be no intubation. Does this check really make sense? Ttenbergen 23:23, 2019 March 25 (CDT)
** I have revised the conditions, pls check if they now make sense.--[[User:JMojica|JMojica]] 16:38, 2019 July 9 (CDT)
*** Actually, no: Someone can arrive intubated from another ICU and then be extubated their first day here. I don't see how Insertion can be included in these two. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 20:13, 2020 December 2 (CST)
**** Julie and Tina discussed this, but Julie wonders how common these false positives would be. Are they rare enough to add at least a soft cross-check for this? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 16:22, 2021 September 2 (CDT)
}}


== Log ==
== Log ==

Revision as of 16:37, 2021 September 16

Data Integrity Checks
Summary: Any marked TISS Item in T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) or in T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) must have the T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) on the same date.
Related: Insertion of ETT (TISS Item), Planned extubation (TISS Item), Unplanned extubation (TISS Item)
Firmness: hard check
Timing: always
App: CCMDB.accdb
Coding: query check_CCI_TISS_Intubation_vs_Intubated
Uses L Problem table: not relevant for this app
Status: implemented
Implementation Date: 2021-01-28
Backlogged: true
  • Cargo


  • SMW


  • Categories: 
  • form:

implemented check details

If any of #intubation or extubation is present on a day, then at least one of #ETT or ventilation also need to be marked for that day.

intubation or extubation

ETT or ventilation

deferred / need discussion details

Julie had requested the following but there could be false positives; flagging for Task to decide if to defer or how to check.

  1. if previous date has no T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) and today date has T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) then T40 - Insertion of ETT (TISS Item) should be marked
    • not necessarily, could have been done in OR or elsewhere
  2. if previous date has T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) and today date has no T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) then previous date of the T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) or T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) should be entered
    • not necessarily, could have been done in OR or elsewhere
  3. if previous date has T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) and today date has T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) and T40 - Insertion of ETT (TISS Item) are marked then today date of T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) or T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) should be marked
    • not necessarily, could have been done in OR or elsewhere

Julie requested

Moved here from Query TISS Errors ETT consistent which turned out to be a duplicate of this same issue.

extubate only when tube present

T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) or T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) can only be marked when T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) is marked in same day.

new tube inserted

When T40 - Insertion of ETT (TISS Item)(T40) is marked, the T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item)(T22) must also be marked in same day.

extubate only when new tube inserted

T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) or T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) can only be marked when both 1) T40 - Insertion of ETT (TISS Item) is marked on same day and 2) T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) is marked in previous day.

T28 - Planned extubation (TISS Item) or T29 - Unplanned extubation (TISS Item) can only be marked when both 1) T40 - Insertion of ETT (TISS Item) is marked on same day and 2) T22 - ETT Present (TISS Item) is not marked the next day.

1

  • A patient might arrive intubated, so there would be no intubation. Does this check really make sense? Ttenbergen 23:23, 2019 March 25 (CDT)
    • I have revised the conditions, pls check if they now make sense.--JMojica 16:38, 2019 July 9 (CDT)
      • Actually, no: Someone can arrive intubated from another ICU and then be extubated their first day here. I don't see how Insertion can be included in these two. Ttenbergen 20:13, 2020 December 2 (CST)
        • Julie and Tina discussed this, but Julie wonders how common these false positives would be. Are they rare enough to add at least a soft cross-check for this? Ttenbergen 16:22, 2021 September 2 (CDT)
  • SMW


  • Cargo


  • Categories

Log

  • 2021-01-28 - Query implemented

Related articles

Related articles: