On 11/12/2011 07:14, rjsearle at gmail.com wrote: > Sounds like: > action = instruct > result = new instruction (eg take your tablets) > > subsequently: > action = follow instruction (take tablets) > result = tablets taken > > So if I understand this correctly, the instruction is NOT the act of > instructing, rather the product of the act. >
I hate to say it, but this is the kind of mess we get into with HL7 mood code thinking. Yes, it's true, everything is an act, in a trivial sense. But that idea doesn't help define EHR information structures, and tends to confuse things because everyone keeps thinking they have to make everything into an Act of some kind when building models of content. But we can do things much more simply. If an Instruction (entry) is committed to the EHR by a clinician, obviously an 'act of instructing' (usually an order of some kind) has occurred - by definition, that is what the Instruction entry is there to document. So we don't need to get tied in knots about whether we have specifically recorded the 'act of instructing' separately from what the instruction says; the recorded Instruction entry automatically indicates the former, and specifically documents the latter, which is what clinicians need to work with. I know people in HL7 will disagree, but this is the route we have taken in openEHR, and it works nicely. - thomas
