Card Tech Minutes 2016.04.05-07: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
:'''Day One, April 5, 2016''' | :'''Day One, April 5, 2016''' | ||
:*Structural Heart | :*Structural Heart | ||
:All of the issues that have come up in the process are documented in the ''Open Issues'' list, in reverse chronological order. | :All of the issues that have come up in the process are documented in the ''Open Issues'' list, in reverse chronological order. If we are closing an item, there should be a note that should document the reasons for the change of status. Some of the items listed are external to the scope of these project. | ||
:Are there any changes from CRC that were made to optimize TAVR? We will create a list of options that must be supported within the profile, possibly with a matrix listing. | |||
:A question [Item 47] was created to document how a patient arrived at an institution. This can be useful for patients who are transferred from facility A to facility B for a procedure, e.g. a VA patient arrives at UW for a cath. Does UW own the data, for registry purposes? The prior release of CRC has dealt with this type of scenario. If a patient has complications it would be the responsibility of the VA, and not be under the control of UW. It may be helpful to ask the ACC Informatics Task Force the clinical benefits and usefulness of this type of report or information. Follow-up and further discussion may offer insight to the workflow theory, but it would not have direct impact on the profile at this time. | |||
Revision as of 09:48, 5 April 2016
- Day One, April 5, 2016
- Structural Heart
- All of the issues that have come up in the process are documented in the Open Issues list, in reverse chronological order. If we are closing an item, there should be a note that should document the reasons for the change of status. Some of the items listed are external to the scope of these project.
- Are there any changes from CRC that were made to optimize TAVR? We will create a list of options that must be supported within the profile, possibly with a matrix listing.
- A question [Item 47] was created to document how a patient arrived at an institution. This can be useful for patients who are transferred from facility A to facility B for a procedure, e.g. a VA patient arrives at UW for a cath. Does UW own the data, for registry purposes? The prior release of CRC has dealt with this type of scenario. If a patient has complications it would be the responsibility of the VA, and not be under the control of UW. It may be helpful to ask the ACC Informatics Task Force the clinical benefits and usefulness of this type of report or information. Follow-up and further discussion may offer insight to the workflow theory, but it would not have direct impact on the profile at this time.