Re: [Gnumed-devel] automatic episode naming

[Karsten Hilbert]

Richard,

I enjoy this discussion. It shows why it's useful that we
keep working together despite our differences in approach.

1) I disagree that there should be progress notes that are
   not linked to an episode/problem (but see below).

2) I fully agree that this linking should not at all unduly
   impede the doctors' workflow.

> > Upon saving the system will try to determine a suitable name
> > for the episode. First it will enforce that the progress
> > note contains at least RFE and Plan. It then uses either
> > Assessment or RFE (in that order) to chose a name for the
> > episode.
Note that this was the agreement with Ian. I seem to
remember him saying you agreed with him on that. I may be
wrong.

Personally, I am OK with enforcing a non-empty progress note
only. I see the merit in enforcing an RFE, too, however. In
my daily practice it wouldn't even make a difference.
Because I could automatically use as an RFE whatever the
patient tells frontdesk staff (this will in some cases be
totally inaccurate, I know).

Maybe other clinicians can speak up here ?

Would you suggest enforcing progress notes to have a
non-empty line in *any* section or a, say, non-empty plan
line ?

> I disagree about the enforcement stuff, and I don't beleive every time the 
> patient sits before me one needs to 'name' the encounter.
I agree it should not be necessary to *manually* name the
episode(s) the progress notes should be linked to. Enforcing
the linkage is just Good Data Practice.

> To me linking the 
> encounter to a problem (eg Hypertension) is a different issue from needing 
> some sort of summary tag for the consultation eg 'Flu' or "Investigation of 
> chest pain'.
I agree.

> I do beleive the option should be there for the doctor to add a 
> summary tag
...
> Now as a final comment, just to make you think I'm disagreeing with myself 
> completely, I do believe the as the patients case-notes are being saved, a 
> modal (yes modal) dialog box should pop up and ask the doctor for a one line 
> (or suggested by intelligent interpretation by the program) summary, to be 
> later displayed as per the png file below. This of course could be blank.
Sounds right to me. I have added this to my personal TODO
list. We even already have a field for that in the backend:

 clin_encounter.description

Currently it just holds something like

 "encounter auto-created then-and-then".

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