gnumed-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] 0.3.2 feedback: EMR tree also Past History item behav


From: Karsten Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] 0.3.2 feedback: EMR tree also Past History item behaviours
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:01:03 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 09:39:56AM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

> Past History items are handled (or at least shown) non-uniformly  
> depending on any text entry into the "Progress note" field inside the  
> EMR > History taking... widget.

Correct.

> In the earlier screenshot, items
>       pseudo item xage 9 w note
>       s/p carcinoid polyp removal
> were both done with some text entry whereas
>       pseudo item to be at age 10
>       s/p cholecystectomy, appendiectomy
> were not.
>
> 4) all 4 items        are past history items, yet 2 items are accorded 3 
> lines 
> in the tree, and two only a single line not showing they are past history 
> items. In point of fact, all health issues becomes part of the past 
> history immediately with the passing of any time, it is just that a 
> subset continue active into the present. So there is something very 
> artificial about this presentation.

Yes. We could rename the artifical episode "Inception notes"
to make things more obvious.

> I understand it may simply be the default result of how the tree  
> programmatically builds from the encounter / episode / clin narrative  
> rows.

Yes, because the "comment" is just another soap row.

> But if the clin.clin_narrative entry which was created with the past  
> history item does in fact lack a proper episode anyway, can the text be 
> expressed other than it is now?

There is currently no other place in the backend for it
unless you want to put it into the label of the health
issue.

> Instead of devoting an "Episode" to it, can such Past History items  
> instead be displayed without an episode until something more than the  
> original entry has happened?

They could but we would need to provide a field for the data
in the backend. I have for now renamed the pseudo episode to
"inception notes" to make things more obvious. There
certainly *was* an episode of some sort back in the days
even if we don't know anything else about it.

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




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]