> preferably there would be the ability to support / enable
> manual MD input of test result data e.g. historical or otherwise
> not importable/interfaced electronically, where it is of sufficient
> value/interest to the doctor to input
We have not included this feature, although it could be added with
ease in
the future. This addition would probably require separate database
tables,
as our lab system is built strictly to handle HL7 lab data.
> - batch download and processing of resulted tests (automated via
> schedule) which I expect is a given basic minimum for an EMR
Yes - the lab module downloads and processes test results automatically
every 10-20 minutes (this value is easily configurable).
> - user-triggerable downloads and processing, for example where the
> Oscar (or source lab) server had been down and come back up and
where
> a scheduled pickup would have been missed. Alternatively where a
> patient is sitting with you in the office and it is suspected that a
> patient's important results could have come available since the last
> scheduled batch job - here it would make the doctor's job easier
than
> to have to phone the lab, wait on hold, and then handle results by
> phone/fax until they can be later imported.
Missing a lab "pickup" shouldn't cause any problems, as the lab
results sit
in a queue on PathNET's servers until they are downloaded. We could
probably give the user the option to trigger PathNET downloads
manually.
However, PathNET has a minimum delay between downloads (10 minutes).
Thus,
user-triggerable downloads, while possible, wouldn't be very useful
due to
PathNET's setup.
> match and link results to individual patients PROVIDED the i.d.
> tags meet pre-defined criteria, otherwise offer soft matches
> for users to confirm (with undo ability)
Our lab module automatically matches Lab data to OSCAR patients based
on PHN
numbers. However, users must verify the matched data before it is
"Linked"
to the patient's EMR. As well, users must manually link any lab
results
that are not matched automatically. Undo functionality is provided.
You
can find a screenshot of our "Patient Linking" page here:
http://blake.redirectme.net/oscar/lab1.jpg
> - unmatched data could represent a patient who does not yet exist in
> OSCAR yet can still be pertinent to the practice (patient referred
in
> but not yet seen/registered, patient seen outside of OSCAR eg at
> hospital and may be seen at the office for the first time in
> followup) - here it would be convenient if the software could permit
> a new patient to be created from the lab data reconciliation screen
> and could helpfully take advantage of info already present in the
lab
> data file (it might include name & demographics?)
It would be possible to do this, but probably not useful due to the
nature
of PathNET's demographic data. For example, their (patient) first,
middle
and last names are all returned in one field, and the patient address
is
also contained in a single field (Street Address, City and Province
combined). These data fields could theoretically be parsed and split
for
insertion into an OSCAR demographic record, but the process could be
rather
messy. I believe it would be simpler from a user perspective to enter
the
demographic data into OSCAR manually.