>From: [log in to unmask]
>
>Thank you Jon, I was begining to wonder why Dr Read was a Millionaire
and Dr
>Risk wasn't. Putting aside the fact that life ain't fair and it should
be the
>other way round, I now see some of the reasons for the differences
between the
>systems and the reason that you can code porcupine quill injury but
not pig
>bite. The international classification of disease requires space craft
>accident and not pig bite looked at from an American academic point of
view,
>or am I being a drunken cynic yet agian?
-----------------------------
To be fair to the code authors at the NHSCCC, once the decision has
been made
to include all ICD-10 codes in Read, there is virtually no work
involved in
putting them in, just a straight copyover.
Filtering out any codes one might take exception to would take work and
debate
and would in any case miss the point of maintaining a map from ICD 10
to Read
so that users of the Read 3 superset could expect to be able to read a
record
imported from a previous practice, or hospital, which used ICD 10
If you want to pick a target for ire, consider why it is not possible
to simply
call for a new code/term to be added, and find a couple of days later
that it
has been added, exposed on the NHSCCC website as a new code, and
available for
your machine to automatically download.
A rapid response, and a little penetration into the Govts own demands
for
information from practices have always seemed to me to be prerequisites
for
Read to really be picked up, and I have educated various health
authority
apparatchicks on my reasons for being irritated when they require me to
pay for
Read, and then demand information in forms which demonstrate they don't
know what the coding system they selected does.
--- OffRoad 1.9r registered to Adrian Midgley
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|