[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?
From: |
Jim Busser |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ? |
Date: |
Mon, 04 Jul 2011 09:54:42 -0700 |
On 2011-07-04, at 8:02 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> 1) "delete" the patient -- which in effect will all but set
> dem.identity.deleted to true
Yes, this could allow scripts (for example results importers) to handle such
patients differently, for example leaving their results unsigned since
presumably .deleted patients are excluded from views. Their results could this
be filtered out from the inbox (or, the script could auto-sign such results
with a virtual provider whose "job" this is).
*** However *** this creates a problem if the praxis receives a call about this
person, who would (as a consequence of being .deleted) "disappear" from the UI
in GNUmed. Therefore risking to misadvise callers "I am sorry, we have never
provided care to that person".
Therefore, the above suggestion is inappropriate to this real problem of
whether or not the praxis is *currently* responsible for the care of this
patient.
I think that tracking (prompting the user on patient activation) when the
patient is inactive vs active (the latter tying a praxis to responsibility for
care) is of *** fundamental importance ***. It warrants to be a primary
attribute and really should be included into dem.identity table.
On patient activation, GNUmed currently warns when a patient lacks a date of
birth, therefore limiting the extent of clinical decision support. it is IMO
equally important to warn of a patient having an inactive status.
Status over time is tracked in
audit.log.identity
however the above schema is currently restricted to gm-dbo access. Therefore if
the history over time is intended to be accessible, it would need to be
normalized to into
dem.identity.status
Is there disagreement whether "status" is of fundamental importance? Or only on
its implementation?
> 2) set an appropriate tag on the patient
(only) as an interim workaround pending a better solution above, sure.
-- Jim
- [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Jim Busser, 2011/07/03
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Karsten Hilbert, 2011/07/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?,
Jim Busser <=
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Karsten Hilbert, 2011/07/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Jim Busser, 2011/07/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Karsten Hilbert, 2011/07/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Jim Busser, 2011/07/04
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Should patients have a "status" ?, Karsten Hilbert, 2011/07/04