In article <[log in to unmask]>, Huw Thomas
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>Discussion document: comments please
>1.8.98
>
>html version at http://www.irnham.demon.co.uk/morbid1.htm
>Information requirements for PCG's
>
>Aims: PCG's represent a major change in the organisation of UK general
>practice. It groups together practices on a geographical basis, and for
>the first time IT advanced (whatever that means) practices will be
big snip
>
>Data recording itself
>The Read codes provide both problems and answers. We code and episode
>type each episode of morbidity (problem title) in each consultation
>(face-to-face, telephone, OOH) and trawl all correspondence to keep our
>records up-to-date. Finding the appropriate Read Code is straightforward
>about 60% of the time. Other times there are several similar codes,
>sometimes pages of them!
>Ideally the PCG should circulate "suggested codes" for conditions (e.g..
>glue ear) where there are several "correct" codes in different
>hierarchies, and the "computer lead GP" sets up synonyms so his partners
>can find preferred codes easily. We use "LBP" to find preferred back
>pain codes and "OTALGIA" to find the earache codes. As many "problems"
>as possible have protocols or templates which automatically put in the
>correct read code. Diabetes, asthma and contraception are run entirely
>by protocols.
>
>Partners are encouraged to use the same code during a single episode, to
>avoid double counting.
>See http://www.irnham.demon.co.uk/morbidit.htm
>
another big snip
How can we encourage our GP collegues in our PCG's to care about the
data they put on their systems - like correcting wrong diagnoses. i keep
coming across patients ?gallstones who come up on searches for
cholelithiasis - no-one routinely or reliably corrects these.
MI's which were never so!!
suggestions from the list for managing these problems...
What do you do??
--
Huw Thomas
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|