Greg Twyford wrote: > David, > > They don't understand how the MD recall system works. They express an > unexplained reservation about recalls in the 3rd edition standards, > now I think I know what it is. > > The action list is the recall system's safety net, so if you print a > list of patients for recalls and [optionally] update or delete the > recalls, they are added to the outstanding actions list. It serves to > remind the GP, on opening the patient notes, or the practice, on > routinely scanning the action list, that a recalled patient may not > have presented to have the issue dealt with. > > If the GP doesn't read or understand the action prompt's message, or > the practice doesn't scan the action list to check that no one > contacted for recall has failed to turn up, then they need to learn > how to use their software, Oops. It is I, who did not know about MD's searchable, printable Action list, not the Accreditors. (Well they didn't know either but they don't use MD.) Apologies to MD. I blame my ignorance on my reluctance to explore proprietary software in depth.
One other thing that the Accreditors were keen on is the recording of an action for all incoming data. We've got this sorted for pathology and radiology. However scanned documents and documents processed through Medical Objects and by direct email allow the recording of a "comment" but this is immediately thrown away. I don't know if this is fixed in version 3.5. (We're on 3.4.1.36.) Has anyone else been quizzed by the Accreditors on this? Does MD have a solution / policy? > or get another job, such as canning fish, IMHO. Horst took me to Cannery Row once, so it looks like I'll be going back. It was very depressing. About the only thing good in the place was the mescaline. Probably beats general practice, though. David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
