Re: [Gnumed-devel] Smoking status - revised.

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 05:28:21PM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

> >Just found the PERFECT place to put Smoking status :))))
> >
> >Right next to the CAVEAT field ... make the field smaller and put
> >it there like alergies ...
> >
> >Oh and obstetrical information is a MUST - HAVE in the demografics,
> >it might not be mandatory ... but it should be there :)
> 
> Taking the second suggestion first, do you mean information about
> previous obstetric history (like Gestations Para Abortions Live) or
> do you mean current gestational information about a pregnancy that is
> in-progress? In the first case it seems more like a special area of
> past clinical history information rather than demographics (unless it
> is the social aspects of who is in this person's social-familial
> unit). In the second case, this would be a special kind of clinical
> information (pregnancy-in-progress) that I do not believe we have yet
> modeled how to manage it dynamically.

I agree.

> As far as the CAVEAT field (or the space next to it) you may be
> interested to search prior postings on the archive for the term "real
> estate" which refers to competition for space within the available
> screen area. :-)

:-)

> The other problem is how to support the possibility that a long list
> of things will each have different importance to different doctors to
> be able to easily see in each patient's record:
> 
> - deaf
> - blind
> - language barrier
> - cognitive impairment
> - hostile or other threat risk
> - smokes
> - drinks alcohol
> - IV drug use
> - other addiction
> - other risk factors
> - very important person / patient
> - risk of abduction or threat from a deranged parent / contact
> - currently pregnant
> - currently participating in one of many research projects
> - currently being managed by a trainee under the supervision of one
> of the primary providers
> 
> I have no answer yet to the above, but only do expect configurability
> of what is displayed to be preferable over customization.

We now do have an answer. All this lends itself very well to
tagging.

> As far as trying to make certain that certain data is reliably
> captured, Karsten might remind us whether a form may be able to be
> engineered to behave as a "wizard" when completing some kind of a
> patient check-list. As part of the form, positive responses could be
> translated into active or inactive (past history of) various specific
> issues such as risks. We must consider that family history can also
> confer a risk, as much or more as for some behaviours, so some more
> thinking around this will definitely be helpful. :-)

Such a wizard could surely be written. It could be invoked
from the hooks framework :-))

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