Re: [Gnumed-devel] coding any SOAP item

[Karsten Hilbert]

> >does it make sense to allow for (not
> >require) codes being attached to any clin_narrative row
> >irrespective of soap_cat
> 
> I agree it makes sense to allow for, but not require , unless someone 
> has a convincing argument to *require* coding. Surely not every row can 
> require to be coded?
No way :-)

> Presumably it could be left for the future,
Well, the reason I asked is that it sort of just falls out
from attaching codes to soAp items making them diagnoses...

> at the point where people 
> want to be able to mark a row as a "billable item",
I'd be strongly opposed to marking a clin_narrative row as
billable. I would vastly prefer a bill_those_rows table that
has a fk_clin_narrative foreign key. For me the distinction of
whether to add a field to clin_narrative is whether it's
adding unique *clinical* value. Billing doesn't. Coding does
(it can greatly facilitate epidemiology).

> to require a code 
> to mark a row is_billable. Would we be just as well to add is_billable 
> to the schema now, or to wait?
a) wait b) add a linked table, do not add it to clin_narrative

> Also, would it be within the Plan of a soaP note that one would code
> - the type of visit service given (minor consultation etc)
should go into one of the billing tables, nothing to do with
clinical data

> - any procedures rendered within the visit? (vaccination)
Just add CPT4 coded soaP rows :-)

> Billing tends to also require a reason
Billing table, IMO.

> or diagnosis code.
ICD-n-coded soAp rows.

> Presumably could be drawn from any of RFE, soAp or from the AOE/Dx 
> rows/records?
Yes.

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346