Burke, I think this reply is a little glib for the CHW situation. CHWs tend to be household-based or geography-based, making the relationship model a little bit gimpy. CHWs also tend to be program oriented, so the CHW needs to be a provider of program services for programs in which they have been trained. Also, their encounters tend to be group-oriented, for which we don’t have easy data entry mechanisms. I think it would be useful to convene a brainstorming session around CHWS, maybe Andy Kanter could make happen.
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Burke Mamlin Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPENMRS-DEV] Modelling Provider Types and Provider Services in OpenMRS 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
