Hi Grant 1. I'm not sure if you are asking about the groupings in the ui or in the models. Non invasive blood pressure could appear wherever it makes most sense for you. You can also use section archetypes to group items in the composition but I would never want to imply meaning by the parent grouping. A blood pressure is a blood pressure whether you consider this locally to be best grouped under examination or investigation. Headings are useful but in openehr the querying is designed to be able to ignore the section archetypes.
2. Is a tricky question as it partly depends on who is asking the question, why and what ought to happen if someone picks up a new diagnosis. Should this be added formally as a diagnosis to the patients record. The pure but more complex approach is to handle this with a set of problem diagnosis archetypes to capture positive responses and exclusion archetypes to handle the negatives. This has the benefit of the data being collected in more reusable and codsble way but is more annoying to hook up to the ui. The quick and dirty alternative is to create a local archetype with a set of booleans that just ask angina yes no. Easy to fit the ui but essentially throw away. Ian. On Thu, 18 Jul 2019, 09:34 J Grant Forrest, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello All, been doing a bit of work (with help from Ian McNicoll) on an > OpenEHR template for surgical pre-operative assessment. > > You can view the results of my efforts (and Ian's) here : > > https://github.com/johngrant4est/surgical_preassessment > > and I'm not sure how this works in terms of sharing but the working repo > is here : > > > https://ehrscape.marand.si/designerv2/#/designer/repos/surgical_preassessment > > The template is being built in the form of a Report, which sort of matches > the real world, in as much as someone does the assessment which is then > made available as a report. > > I have 2 challenges currently : > > 1. How to group the concepts of Biometrics, Physiological variables e.g. > Vital Signs and Investigation Results e.g. labs, radiology. These all feel > as though they should be grouped somehow as part of the assessment but > there is a conflict (in my head) between the archetypes for > investigations_results and exam findings. Is NIBP an investigation or an > exam finding ? I appreciate that the line between these concepts is a bit > blurred. > > 2. How to model the typical systematic enquiry when taking a history > relevant for peri-op care, e.g. how to record the presence of angina, > hypertension, heart failure, murmurs and group them under "Cardiovascular". > > Any thoughts ? > > Cheers > > Grant > -- > > Dr J Grant Forrest > Webmaster, SCATA > www.scata.org.uk > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org >
_______________________________________________ openEHR-clinical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical_lists.openehr.org
