Thanks Ben and Burke,
One thing Mark brings up is the notion that we want to be able to model
Types of Providers, as well as the types of services that they can
provide. Is there any notion of this built into the 1.9 Provider model
or the future road map for Provider? Is the intention that
ProviderAttribute is meant to provide sufficient flexibility to
encapsulate either Provider Types or Provider Services (or Provider
anything else) as needed? If so, I get that, but want to confirm that
this is the direction intended. I could see a case for modeling one or
both of these explicitly, as it would seem that ProviderType is
something we are going to frequently want to support (eg. show a list of
all Surgeons on form X, or all Community Health Workers on page Y).
Mike
On 03/13/2012 12:26 PM, Burke Mamlin wrote:
The encounter represents a clinical transaction in our model, so as
Ben suggests, a provider providing clinical services for a patient
would fall into an encounter, which (eventually) could generate any
number of observations, orders, notes, or form data.
For denoting ongoing relationships between persons (e.g., providers &
patients), we would use the relationship model.
To connect multiple encounters over time, you could use the visit
model (created to group encounters, but usually representing a series
of contiguous encounters) or the yet-to-be-implemented episodes of
care, which are designed to connect encounters related to a treatment
program across multiple, possibly non-contiguous, visits (e.g.,
pregnancy).
FWIW, I believe we added (or planned to add) date ranges to
relationships; however, if you want to track "service" (possibly for
billing purposes), then I would suggest using visits, since that's
where an account number would go.
Note that these aren't mutually exclusive. For example, you could
create relationships to track relationships between accompagnateurs
and their patients and still record encounters +/- visits for clinical
transactions between the provider and their patient.
-Burke
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Mark Goodrich <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Ben,
Hmm… that may be the way to do it generically, but I don’t know if
it works for us since we need to model this over time.
Mark
*From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of
*Ben Wolfe
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 13, 2012 11:39 AM
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] Modelling Provider Types and Provider
Services in OpenMRS
Would you be able to store these as the encounterrole for that CHW
for each encounter?
Ben
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Mark Goodrich <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I’ve been looking at the new Provider model in 1.9, and I was
wondering if thought has been put into modeling provider types
(Cardiologist, PCP) and specific provider services, and how to
record that a provider provided a specific service to a patient.
Do we have a vision as to how we may want to model this going forward?
The reason I’m asking is that I’m currently working on determining
how PIH wants to model Community Health Workers within our system,
and I’m considering how they may fall into a more generic provider
structure. We want to be able to handle various types of CHWs
(Accompagnateurs, Pallative care workers, Community Health Nurses)
that provide various services (HIV accompaniment, end-of-life
care, etc) that we’d like to be able to model, and then we’d like
to be able to track what services are being provided to what
patients. Additionally, we need to track the dates over which a
CHW provided such a service, ie:
“Accompagnateur A provided HIV accompaniment to Patient B from
1/2/2010 to 3/4/2011”
At first, it seems like Relationships would be the way to model
this kind of interaction, since a relationship defines a
relationship between two people, and (as of 1.9) can have a start
date and an end date. However, it doesn’t quite seem to be the
right way to do this, primarily because a relationship is a
Person-to-Person relationship, when what we are modeling is a
Provider-to-Patient relationship. It seems like this is an
archetypical relationship in an EMR that it may make sense to
model in a different manner than general relationships.
Take care,
Mark
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
_________________________________________
To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to
[email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not
the subject) of your e-mail.
[mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
