Historic Links:
...
- Reached consensus on designs for a new "Orders" page in the O3 RefApp; Wamz has updated the designs based on the Squad's feedback from last week (see the updated version here) and Pius has begun work implementing this.
- Wamz & Casey agreed to become co-leads of this Feature Squad This squad will meet weekly on Tuesdays at 2pm UTC (5pm EAT / 7:30pm IST / 10am EDT / 7am PDT). Added to OMRS community calendar; co-leads to make calendar changes as needed.
- All agreed to use the OMRS Jira Labs Epic to track this work here:
.Jira Legacy server OpenMRS Issues serverId 45c5771b-fa4b-3e43-b34a-c19dc45ccc95 key O3-1826 - Wamz to move relevant docs into OMRS wiki.
Squad for Labs v2: Kick-Off Call Oct 16 2023
...
Area | Now: What we have now (as of Oct 16th) | Where we want to go: Next Priorities | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Order Labs/Tests |
|
| Implementation: Options are from all concepts called "Test" Lower priority: Provider's "Favorites" (_____) Ideally, any order generated in OpenMRS would be automatically assigned a unique and human-friendly (not a UUID) order number (stored in |
Per Patient: Order Status and Lab Status | Nothing |
| Order status, lab status, and lab result interpretation are different things
Given the above, "critically high" is a lab interpretation, not an order status or lab status. If we want to create a dashboard showing We need to figure out how to handle exceptions (e.g., insufficient specimen) in a way that aligns us with FHIR. In HL7 v2, the observation's status would be set to "X" and the reason for exception (e.g., "Insufficient specimen") would be placed in the observation comment. FHIR documentation implies the observation status be set to cancelled and the Observation..dataAbsentReason be used; however, the values for data absent don't have obvious choices for "insufficient specimen." It would help to have an "official" recommendation of best practice in FHIR on how to use observations to report exceptional lab results (specimen not received, inadequate specimen, etc.). One challenge when working with an external lab system, will be knowing when to mark an order as completed. For example, a provider orders "FULL HEMOGRAM" and it is assigned order number #123. We sent this order to the lab (including the order number). Over the next 8 hours, we receive to lab results that reference order number #123: one is HEMOGLOBIN and the other is PLATELET COUNT. Do we consider the FULL HEMOGRAM order complete? Or will more results come later? The answer may be known by the lab system, but we may not be able to reliably get this information from the lab system, so we may need to come up with a business rule as a compromise (e.g., LabSet with any result received & 24 hours after order placed is considered completed). Phlebotomy Status: Drawn? Label Printing? Where someone needs to add #'s like Reference #, Sample #, Accession #? In general, humans shouldn't have to transcribe these (they should be auto-generated and sent between systems). When there are paper-based workflows, humans may need to transcribe them from a paper requisition into the system. Status page: rejections of samples by lab. Critical results, alert worthy? Certainly on the status page, but do you want to bug the ordering doc as well? I just wanted to add this so I don’t forget when we run out of time. |
All Patients: Order Status |
| (In Lieu of a bigger Lab Info System; similar to Dispensing App) | |
Results Entry |
|
| |
Results Viewing |
| No Order relationship yet... "Orderable" vs "Viewable": Filter to exclude stuff you don't need to see in the Order view, (want to see "Blood Cultures" in orders, but not the sub-tests for each strain of resistance), PIH has driven through "Orderable Labs ConvSet" that tend to be different per country | |
Result Alerts Inbox | None; lab-specific results | Future |
...