The EHR contains what needs to be documented, to be said, in view of
the fact that it is the life long record about one patient, isn't it?
GF
-- private --
Gerard Freriks, arts
Huigsloterdijk 378
2158 LR Buitenkaag
The Netherlands
T: +31 252 544896
M: +31 653 108732
On 4-mei-2006, at
: Re: removal of
data
owner-openehr-technical@
openehr.org
In een bericht met de datum 4-5-2006 15:30:25 West-Europa (zomertijd),
schrijft hammo001 at mc.duke.edu:
Mcuh of an opinion of this topic depends on what your view of an EHR is.
My view is very specific and focused. The EHR contains the data that is
important for the present and future
Funny?
After many years of discussions,
after one definitive ISO TR on the topic of the definition,
I read that Ed Hammond fears that people will disagree with his views.
What you described is :
4.6.2 Definition Integrated Care EHR
The Integrated Care EHR (ICEHR) is defined as a repository of
Sent by:cc:
owner-openehr-technical at openehr.org
owner-openehr-technical@Subject: Re: removal of
data
Op maandag 24 april 2006 17:11, schreef Thomas Beale:
Bert Verhees wrote:
available in the API) requires a higher level of access than other
operations, i.e. cannot just be done by any normal user - it might
require a system administrator with special permissions. This is
because physical
Je suis absente du bureau jusqu'au jeudi 26 avril 2006.
Sandrine Villaeys
Thomas Beale wrote:
Technically, deletion is easy, but there are consequences for consistency
and legal value of the data. So making it harder to do is sensible. We
have to realise that all such legislation as has been mentioned here is
written as if we were in 1850, still writing everything
) of the
community.
So not having a proper removal of patients-data or even a complete
patient-record API is in my opinion opposite against some of the
OpenEhr goals.
no, that's not the intention; in fact we already have in the APIs being
used in Australia the possibility to split one EHR into two EHRs
Bert Verhees wrote:
I understood that physically deleting (which is, in my view, complete removal
of records (leaving no trace at all) is impossible except by bypassing the
kernel and doing it manually. The reasons why I understood this are
following.
- Gerard said it should not be
Tim Churches wrote:
One of the reasons why people are reluctant to include facilities for
physical deletion seems to be the need for a legal record of the
information which was available to clinicians and others at particular
points in time. That's a reasonable concern, but such concerns can
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20060424/0fc599d8/attachment.html
Tim Churches wrote:
OK, that sounds good. An alternative modus operandi for digital
notarisation is for the EHR to generate a self-signed digest for each
new version of a record, send that digest to a third-party notary, who
then counter-signs the digest and sends it back to the EHR, which
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 07:10:08PM +1000, Tim Churches wrote:
OK, that sounds good. An alternative modus operandi for digital
notarisation is for the EHR to generate a self-signed digest for each
new version of a record, send that digest to a third-party notary, who
then counter-signs the
Thomas Beale schreef:
Bert,
I think you are making this much more complicated than it needs to be.
There is nothing /a priori/ to stop physical deletion of _parts_ of a
record. However in version controlled systems, something special
behind the scenes is usually needed to effect it. How
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:43:35PM +1000, Tim Churches wrote:
http://www.gnotary.de
provides just that. The site is in German. It offers an
implementation of what Horst Herb originally proposed in the
gnotary concept.
...
Contact Sebastian for information in English (my brother, so
Thomas Beale schreef:
Bert,
I think you are making this much more complicated than it needs to be.
There is nothing /a priori/ to stop physical deletion of _parts_ of a
record. However in version controlled systems, something special
behind the scenes is usually needed to effect it. How
Bert Verhees wrote:
available in the API) requires a higher level of access than other
operations, i.e. cannot just be done by any normal user - it might
require a system administrator with special permissions. This is
because physical removal of pieces of an EHR (like pieces of any
Friends,
Data, information and knowlegde exists, can be interpreted in a
spefic context, only.
Data, information and knowledge without a context can be considered
garbage.
It can not be interpreted faithfully.
It is nothing more than a string of codes.
Always data, information, knowledge
from this
that OpenEhr has the desire to not be nation-specific, and should have
features which are needed (f.e. for repairing an errorneous post of
data), or even in a minority (f.e. to be local law compliant) of the
community.
So not having a proper removal of patients-data or even a complete
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:11:47PM +0100, Thomas Beale wrote:
entered by a physician or nurse wrongly using patient A's EHR). There might
be other ways it could get there, but in openEHR, if the info was put in
record A, there is no way to know it was meant for somewhere else.
Well, a common
Dear all,
In the paper world, I know, it is clear.
A document with legal implications can never be destroyed without any
trace.
A document with legal implications can be removed from a registry in
one place and moved to a special registry, folder, cupboard, etc.
And the same is true for
Gerard Freriks schreef:
Dear all,
In the paper world, I know, it is clear.
A document with legal implications can never be destroyed without any
trace.
A document with legal implications can be removed from a registry in
one place and moved to a special registry, folder, cupboard, etc.
Dear Bert,
Reading again a thick report by our Royal Dutch Medical Association
about the interpretation of this pecific Dutch law my opinion is NOT
changed.
In a separate e-mail you can read some relevant pages.
In summary. 'Information can be destroyed' is the text.
There are two important
Hi Gerard,
There are more emails on this subject, I did not yet read them all, I
will within a day or so, at this moment I don't have the time.
I saw in a glimpse that there was a possibility to remove data, but
maybe I m wrong, it was only a glimpse. I will come back to this.
The purpose of
openEHR supports logical deletion of content in the following way (see
updated Common IM - change_control section of
http://svn.openehr.org/specification/BRANCHES/Release-1.1-candidate/publishing/architecture/rm/common_im.pdf):
- a new Version is created
- VERSION.data is removed. The current
Mikael Nystr?m wrote:
I know that it is very hard to completely remove (parts of) an electronic
health record, but the law is still the law and we therefore must follow it.
It happens now and then in Sweden that we must remove (parts of) an
electronic health record completely (and not only
William E Hammond wrote:
Maybe we Americans are the only ones who screw up, but one of the reasons I
have to remove data from the EHR is when the data manages to get into the
wrong patient's record. Unfortunately for every right way to do something,
there are many wrong ways. I have said
at openehr.org
Subject: RE: removal of data
Maybe we Americans are the only ones who screw up, but one of the reasons I
have to remove data from the EHR is when the data manages to get into the
wrong patient's record. Unfortunately for every right way to do something,
there are many wrong ways. I
, april 18, 2006 18:23
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Subject: Re: removal of data
Bert,
Ik heb dat nergens gelezen.
Het verwijderen is altijd onderworpen aan de beslissing van de arts.
De termijn waarna gegevens moeten worden verwijderd is nu 15 jaar.
En dan is het ook nog
Op maandag 17 april 2006 04:08, schreef Sam Heard:
Hi everyone
In fact both situations are available in openEHR. In the general case and
without access to the repository it is only possible to create a new
version which has no information and mark it as deleted. This is generally
true for
First, I want to thank everyone for their contributions on this discussion, it
helped me a lot.
Now I discovered today, there is a law in the Netherlands which obliges
care-takers (GP's etc) to remove all records for patients demanding this
(within 3 months of demand, and after some years of
at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Gerard Freriks
Sent: den 17 april 2006 08:28
To: openehr-technical at openehr.org
Subject: Re: removal of data
I agree that is very seldom.
For many (technical) reasons it is completely impossible to remove all
information as if it was never written.
for example
Sent by:cc:
owner-openehr-technical@Subject: RE: removal of
data
For the non Swedish speakers .. here's a rough translation (not exact but to
give the general gist!)...
The patient or any other person that is mentioned in the patients file, can
apply or can ask to have the file, or parts of the files destroyed. [the
government office] will decide if the file
Let me enlighten my question
Bert Verhees schreef:
Thanks again for the help with the authorization-question, I was lost
in the wrong document of the specs.
I must say, reading the specs, really is not something for a rainy
afternoon, but it is worth it.
I have another question, probably
Thanks again for the help with the authorization-question, I was lost in
the wrong document of the specs.
I must say, reading the specs, really is not something for a rainy
afternoon, but it is worth it.
I have another question, probably it also is in the specs, but I didn't
find it.
37 matches
Mail list logo
