-technical_lists.openehr.org
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/543cc85d/attachment-0001.html
Hi Norbert,
You have to unsubscribe yourself via the link at the bottom of this email.
Ian
On 15 April 2013 07:47, irl at club-internet.fr wrote:
Could you please take me off this distribution list
Thank you
Norbert Lipszyc
Message du :
--
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/37d209c5/attachment-0001.html
patient record, as a general rule.
- thomas
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/64732a83/attachment.html
...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/634c5659/attachment.html
-technical_lists.openehr.org
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/4ae97c5e/attachment-0001.html
On 15/04/2013 14:37, Grahame Grieve wrote:
big risk - it's a combination of how likely it is, and how bad it is
if they are.
Generally, current location, current medication lists, summary lists
are things where contention can happen. Quite often, I've seen, a
cascade of things will happen
On 15/04/2013 16:15, Bert Verhees wrote:
On 04/15/2013 03:37 PM, Grahame Grieve wrote:
big risk - it's a combination of how likely it is, and how bad it is
if they are.
Generally, current location, current medication lists, summary lists
are things where contention can happen. Quite often,
Hi Thomas,
I can certainly see a situation where e.g A medication order was
issued and the medication administered within a short time period,
requiring dynamic persistent medication summary updates (with
references/links to the original Entries in event Compositions) where
a lazy commit could
On 15/04/2013 14:37, Grahame Grieve wrote:
big risk - it's a combination of how likely it is, and how bad it is
if they are.
Generally, current location, current medication lists, summary lists
are things where contention can happen. Quite often, I've seen, a
cascade of things will happen
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130415/f78bf88d/attachment.html
On 15/04/2013 15:43, Ian McNicoll wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I can certainly see a situation where e.g A medication order was
issued and the medication administered within a short time period,
well, 'short' here probably means at least minutes... that's 'long' in
computing terms.
requiring dynamic
Hi,
Is there a mimetype defined for ADL-files?
And if not, what is advised to use?
Thanks
Bert
On 04/15/2013 06:12 PM, Thomas Beale wrote:
patient sees the GP, then visits a practice
nurse, without the GP record being committed first.
yes, that's certainly a possibility, if the practice solution isn't
designed to deal with it, and the staff are not trained...
In the Netherlands there
On 04/15/2013 08:37 PM, Grahame Grieve wrote:
but you can't afford to do either version based merging, or to lose
either the previously committed information
But what if every user, nurses or GP create a new composition, when they
do an addition. Then there is nothing lost.
Bert
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 08:40:59PM +0200, Bert Verhees wrote:
On 04/15/2013 06:12 PM, Thomas Beale wrote:
patient sees the GP, then visits a practice
nurse, without the GP record being committed first.
yes, that's certainly a possibility, if the practice solution isn't
designed to deal
On 04/15/2013 09:11 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
It is a problem not solvable by technical means alone.
That was, more or less the point I was trying to illustrate.
But technical means should be able to support these kind of situations
in the agreed work-flow in that practice.
Bert
/attachments/20130415/ec6a01aa/attachment-0001.html
On 04/15/2013 09:39 PM, Grahame Grieve wrote:
well, yes, there'd be nothing lost, and everything would be in the database.
But if the users can only see the last update, then prior stuff is lost
anyway. If, on the other hand, users can see the older updates, then they'd
simply have no idea
19 matches
Mail list logo