Re: [Gnumed-devel] another vista at abnormality/relevance flags

[James Busser]

On 9-Apr-08, at 1:35 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
> 3) No, because neither am I responsible nor am I the first
>    to see this result (and they did sign it). In which case
>    I still *can* sign if I choose to.

But there wouldn't be a point... wait... I think above you are using  
responsible to denote the doctor who ordered the test. I f I am  
neither of the above but the patient sees me for a related or  
unrelated problem (say in the absence of the usual GP) after the  
results had already been signed, the question is whether I somehow  
want to make a record of having seen the results.

However if there is no disagreement with what had been already  
entered for whether they were abnormal or clinically significant, I  
don't see the point of recording "I have seen those specific results  
and was aware of and agreed with the recorded interpretation" however  
are we then going to document every read-activity like the review of  
documents by re-signing already-signed documents?

To me, the answer would be no. At most you would enter into a ***  
progress note *** something like

	"documents <optionally identified> and results <optionally specific  
ones> noted"

if those would have been important to updating a clinical assessment.