[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Storage and and representation (formatting?) of past
From: |
Karsten Hilbert |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Storage and and representation (formatting?) of past history items |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:48:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) |
On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:11:43AM -0800, James Busser wrote:
> On 14-Jan-08, at 4:38 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
>> Pragmatism in a GP office dicates to make do with three levels:
>> apparent causating health issue (may change over time)
>> episode of activity of symptoms of issue
>> patient-provider interaction incident within episode
>
> I do agree with this pragmatic implementation. The internist in me just
> wanted the satisfaction of seeing what options would exist *inside* a
> pragmatic implementation. The method appears it would be:
>
> - create the new, enclosing health issue by one of many ways
> ... best: control-click an episode that is to be associated to the new
> issue and simply name the issue in the "Base issue" field
> ... via EMR tree (control-click top-most "patient" item)
> ... via EMR menu > Medical history... > Past history (Foundational issue)
> ... via progress note (create new episode and enter "phx" in the save
> popup)
>
> - identify (other) episodes that are to be associated with the new
> enclosing health issue
>
> - consider whether to merge these episodes' current health issue names into
> the episodes' names
>
> - associate the episodes with the new enclosing health issue
All of which the current client can do.
> Would it be easy / hard to support drag-and-drop to relocate an episode
> under a different health issue?
Not "easy" with the current emr tree code but planned and
reasonably easily achievable with the next iteration of it
(1.0 material).
> In absence of this, the change is achieved
> by control-clicking and filling in an alternative value, which is helpfully
> facilitated by the phrasewheel.
Which provides matches from the current patient's issues, of
course, not all issues in the database.
> Drag-and-drop would have to update the
> backend value in the "Base issue" field.
Yes.
Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346