hi The principle concern I had was definitional - did the definition of problem preclude it's use for complications of an event. There's a notion of ongoing-ness hinted at in the definition, but nothing explicit. And there's the question about whether (or which) complications of an event have ongoing implications or not.
Clearly there's no definitional issue, and so I'm fine with that. Regarding the other discussion - since complications can indeed be real ongoing concerns, I think it would be good for complications to be actually problems, and explicitly, not using a reference model link. Though there might still be a use for pure complications, which might be more procedural in nature? Grahame On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Heather Leslie < heather.leslie at oceaninformatics.com> wrote: > I think that many scenarios are possible.**** > > ** ** > > Complications can occur at the time of procedure, can become apparent at a > distant time and place, or occur at same place and within the same system > at a later time.**** > > ** ** > > In a complete EHR system there are a number of options. But it is the > exchange scenario that is trickier.**** > > ** ** > > I think there is probably some advantage in recording something explicit > about Complication within the Procedure archetype that will point to the > Problem/Diagnosis for details. And similarly if the Problem/Diagnosis is > entered first, subsequently pointing to a Procedure ACTION as causal will > be valuable. The link both ways are useful. But if procedure does not have > any notion of complication within it and is separated from the rest of the > EHR in a report or message or research aggregation, there is no indication > to anyone receiving the data that something untoward may have happened.*** > * > > ** ** > > Heather**** > > ** ** > > **** > > *From:* openEHR-clinical [mailto: > openehr-clinical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] *On Behalf Of *Sam Heard > *Sent:* Wednesday, 17 April 2013 8:59 PM > *To:* For openEHR clinical discussions > *Subject:* RE: Complications in an event**** > > ** ** > > Ian replied much inline with my views. If it is a serious complication, > such as pneumonia, it will have its own diagnosis as well, which may even > contain a following aetiology statement to point back. > > I would not directly embed the notion of a diagnosis in a procedure. > > Cheers Sam > > Dr Sam Heard > FRACGP, MRCGP, DRCOG, FACHI > Chairman, Ocean Informatics > Chairman, openEHR Foundation > Chairman, NTGPE > +61417838808**** > ------------------------------ > > *From: *Grahame Grieve <grahame at healthintersections.com.au> > *Sent: *16/04/2013 9:19 PM > *To: *For openEHR clinical discussions<openehr-clinical at lists.openehr.org> > *Subject: *Re: Complications in an event**** > > Hi Sam **** > > ** ** > > Procedure does have complications, but it's a simple text / codeableText. > **** > > We'd rather use Problem/Diagnosis. So the real question is, does the > definition **** > > of Problem/Diagnosis exclude it's use for for complications of a specific > event.**** > > ** ** > > Grahame**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Sam Heard <sam.heard at oceaninformatics.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi All > > It would be good to include Heather here who has been working on operation > notes. I would have thought that complications within the procedure would > potentially be useful. > > Cheers, Sam > > -----Original Message----- > From: openEHR-clinical [mailto:openehr-clinical-bounces at lists.openehr.org] > On Behalf Of Karsten Hilbert > Sent: Tuesday, 16 April 2013 4:33 PM > To: openehr-clinical at lists.openehr.org > Subject: Re: Complications in an event**** > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:30:17PM +1000, Grahame Grieve wrote: > > > If you are recording an event - perhaps a procedure - and you have > > complications to record, are these problem/diagnoses?**** > > That depends on clinical judgment in each case. > > Karsten > -- > GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de > E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346 > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > **** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > ----- > http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at > healthintersections.com.au/ +61 > 411 867 065 **** > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org > -- ----- http://www.healthintersections.com.au / grahame at healthintersections.com.au/ +61 411 867 065 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130419/6aaf434c/attachment-0001.html>
