Task Team Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2021: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Ttenbergen (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
***HSC Critical Care / Obstetrics -- 1 of these, in MICU | ***HSC Critical Care / Obstetrics -- 1 of these, in MICU | ||
**HSC Critical Care / Oncology -- 1 of these, in SICU | **HSC Critical Care / Oncology -- 1 of these, in SICU | ||
*So, there seem to few enough of these that categorization isn’t a big problem. HOWEVER, Tina identified that working with Chastity she has | *So, there seem to few enough of these that categorization isn’t a big problem. HOWEVER, Tina identified that working with Chastity she has now come to recognized that Cognos has 3 concepts within it that relate to service. SO '''before we go further with assigning patients to ICU services, Tina/Julie will look further into this and we’ll discuss further at our next Task meeting.''' | ||
3. Followup on the recent changes St. B admitting made as regards to identifying ICU services. | 3. Followup on the recent changes St. B admitting made as regards to identifying ICU services. | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
*Thereafter, work to obtain CBS TraceLine for all transfusion data. Margaret Ring again (margaret.ring@blood.ca). | *Thereafter, work to obtain CBS TraceLine for all transfusion data. Margaret Ring again (margaret.ring@blood.ca). | ||
*Thereafter, work to obtain RIS data for radiology tests. Shared Health CIO Charles Conway [204-926-1400; cconway3@sharedhealthmb.ca]. | *Thereafter, work to obtain RIS data for radiology tests. Shared Health CIO Charles Conway [204-926-1400; cconway3@sharedhealthmb.ca]. | ||
== ICU Database Task Group Meeting – December 11, 2019 == | == ICU Database Task Group Meeting – December 11, 2019 == | ||
Revision as of 09:44, 2021 January 7
List of items to bring to task meeting
Add to this by adding the following to the article where the problem is documented:
{{DiscussTask | explanation}}
| Question | Modification date"Modification date" is a predefined property that corresponds to the date of the last modification of a subject and is provided by Semantic MediaWiki. | |
|---|---|---|
| Gangrene, NOS | can we use this code for necrosis or necrotic wounds? Lisa Kaita 11:57, 2024 April 17 (CDT) | 17 April 2024 17:03:39 |
| Hemothorax or hemopneumothorax, nontraumatic | Just wondering whether this code could be combined with iatrogenic causes similar to the guideline for:
Guideline for Iatrogenic Pneumothorax According to our general rule of not coding iatrogenic events as traumas, code an iatrogenic pneumothorax as
Plus the most appropriate of the following; Pneumothorax, tension, nontraumatic Pneumothorax, nontension, nontraumatic Pneumothorax, nontraumatic, NOS Thanks, Pamela Piche 08:55, 2024 March 19 (CDT)
| 5 April 2024 20:03:05 |
| ICD10 Guideline Sepsis | When the progression is very fast eg. admitted at 0100 with severe sepsis, lactate 1.7, then at 0220 lactate is now 2.7 do we use the admit severe sepsis and code the septic shock as acquired? Lisa Kaita 12:17, 2024 April 17 (CDT) How hard of a rule is lactate >2? If they meet the criteria for septic shock with the exception of a high enough lactate, can we code septic shock Lisa Kaita 12:17, 2024 April 17 (CDT) | 17 April 2024 17:17:33 |
| Iatrogenic, mechanical complication/dysfunction, internal prosthetic device or implant or graft NOS | At our last TASK meeting the decision was made to exclude spontaneous rupture of an ETT cuff or cuff leak, but we are wondering if this is correct based on what is listed in the includes section of this page and what is in Iatrogenic, mechanical complication/dysfunction, internal orthopedic prosthetic device or implant or graft or bone device and Iatrogenic, mechanical complication/dysfunction, cardiac or vascular prosthetic device or implant or graft, NOS Lisa Kaita 12:37, 2024 March 20 (CDT) | 20 March 2024 17:37:32 |
| Myocardial infarction, acute (AMI), NOS | ICD 10 has this code for STEMI:
2024 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code I21.3
ICD 10 has this code for NSTEMI: 2024 ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code I21.4
Would it be less labor intensive for collectors to be able to use these codes instead of MI codes dependent upon development (or not) of Q waves as this is problematic to determine. Thank you, Pamela Piche 07:49, 2024 April 5 (CDT)
| 5 April 2024 20:10:42 |
| Task Questions | ||
Also see Task Team Meeting - Rolling Agenda and Minutes 2020
ICU Database Task Group Meeting – December 16, 2020
Last from 2020, copied here as a starting point for the first meeting in 2021, these should be overwritten
- Present: Present: Allan, Barret, Tina, Julie, Trish, Pam, Stephanie, Mindy, Gladys, Gail, Lisa, Joyce, Mailah
- Minutes prepared by: AG
- Action items in BOLD
1. Continued discussion of PatientFollow Project, Change from Service Location to Service, Boarding Loc and Transfer Ready DtTm tmp entry, Definition of a Medicine Service admission
- Further questions arose of which Onc, Renal, Neuro patients to include in the Medicine database. After discussion we recognized that the issue here is whether or not the patient is “using Medicine resources”, which include staff and beds. So, by this criterion:
- We WILL include Onc, Renal, Neuro patients who are physically located on a mixed COVID ward (i.e. locations that have both Medicine and non-Medicine (e.g. surgery) beds). Rationale is that those beds ARE a Medicine resource.
- We will NOT include Onc, Renal, Neuro patients who are in ED (e.g. EMIPs). Rationale is that those beds are NOT a Medicine resource.
2, Continued discussion of patients admitted to an ICU service.
- Last meeting we mapped existing Cognos services to their respective ICUs in each site. This was possible with all except the following 7 services, for which Julie has now gone back and over the past 2 months identified patients with those services:
- HSC Critical Care / Adult General -- 0 of these
- HSC Critical Care / Amputee -- 0 of these
- HSC Critical Care / General -- 2 of these, both in SICU
- HSC Critical Care / Intensive Care -- 3 of these, 2 in MICU, 1 in SICU
- HSC Critical Care / Obstetrics -- 1 of these, in MICU
- HSC Critical Care / Oncology -- 1 of these, in SICU
- So, there seem to few enough of these that categorization isn’t a big problem. HOWEVER, Tina identified that working with Chastity she has now come to recognized that Cognos has 3 concepts within it that relate to service. SO before we go further with assigning patients to ICU services, Tina/Julie will look further into this and we’ll discuss further at our next Task meeting.
3. Followup on the recent changes St. B admitting made as regards to identifying ICU services.
- Collectors report that things have greatly improved, though some mistakes are still being made. In particular, there is use made of the service “SBGH Critical Care / General”. We hope that these errors will decline as Admitting office staff become more familiar.
- But we also decided to defer further discussion of this to the next Task meeting, for same reason as the last point of item#2, above.
4. Followup regarding having data collectors do all TISS coding
- Has only begun at St. B, not yet at HSC or Grace where pink sheets are still being used
- Towards the goal of making this change in all sites, Tina and Trish will work with collectors to fine-tune the laptop tool for collecting TISS info, and to get them trained up to use it.
5. New questions
- Whether and how to code someone who has recovered from COVID-19. After discussion we agreed this is no different from any infection, and that once active infection is gone (even if manifestations such as respiratory fibrosis and respiratory failure remain) that we will NOT code it. Specifically, as the WHO has not seen fit to create an ICD-10 code for past history of COVID-19, we won’t either.
- It was pointed out that there is a discrepency between collection of PRBC transfusions in CCI vs. the Transfusion guideline. After discussion we agreed (largely for simplicity of coding) that the rule will be: Code the 1st date of PRBC administration and the total number of units of PRBC given from that point onwards. Tina to fix this discrepency.
- There are “locations” listed in Cognos that are variously called “Swap” or “Swing” at the different hospitals. These may or may not actually related to a change in physical locations. Clearly we need to sort out how we are going to handle these. Tina will review and we’ll discuss further at the next Task meeting.
- Discussion about what name to use for what has previously been called “Boarding Loc”. In Cognos it goes by the name “assigned unit”, but this may ambiguously imply the final destination. So we agreed to call this field “Unit”.
6. Followup on trying to get hospital-level data elements from EPR.
- Allan provided Bojan/Ebi with a written explanation of what is being requested -- we need to followup on this item.
7. Followup about working to reduce collector workload. Things that need to be done:
- Find a new hosting/software infrastructure that can be in full compliance with privacy requirements. Allan and Tina will followup with CHI and Digital Health to pursue new hosting possibilities.
- Thereafter, work to obtain CBS TraceLine for all transfusion data. Margaret Ring again (margaret.ring@blood.ca).
- Thereafter, work to obtain RIS data for radiology tests. Shared Health CIO Charles Conway [204-926-1400; cconway3@sharedhealthmb.ca].