Patient Summary Sample Clauses

Patient Summary. The Patient Summary is understood as a minimum set of patient’s data which would provide a health professional with essential information needed in case of unexpected or unsched- uled care. Some countries have developed “small” emergency data sets typically including patient data such as patient demographics, contact info, insurance data, allergies and prescription data. In some countries like Spain and Scotland such a minimum data set are officially defined by means of a previous process necessary to reach the consensus. There is a wide variation of contents, from a small set in the case of Scotland to a set as wide as almost a whole health record in the case of Slovenia. In the middle point it contains only the most relevant data for unscheduled situations (although they were not urgent) like Spain, Germany, Netherlands and other countries. Similar differences between countries are found for coding and classification methods. Table: Data sets contained in typical types of Patient Summaries Emergency Data Set Example Connected Health Report Dataset US CCR minimum dataset • Document identification • Patient identifying info • Health Care Provider • Own doctor • Relatives • Insurance info • Allergies • Current medication Emergency data plus… • Chronic conditions • Main and minor diagno- ses • Main problems • Advance directives • inoculations • Care Plan Recommenda- tion • Patient history • Medical notes • Patient notes • Lab-results and proce- dures. • Document identifying • Health Care Provider • Reason for referral • Patient identifying infor- mation • Insurance and financial Info • Patient health status • Diagnoses • Allergies • Current medication, Im- munization • Xxxxx xxxxx • Lab-results and proce- dures. • Care Documentation in text • Care Plan Recommenda- tion Also outside Europe types of patient summary are being developed. In the United States the American standardization organization ASTM has defined a “large” mandatory minimum dataset named “CCR – Continuity of Care Record” for communication between different health organizations. For a comparison, see Table 1 above. The precise terminological content of the different parts of the Patient Summary are going to be defined in the LSP project. This work will be done in close cooperation with the participat- ing member states and industry. The work process will include the following steps: • Analyzing semantic data content and use of codes and classifications in the partici- pating national implement...

Patient Summary. In this analysis it is assumed that it is a local choice to decide if (a) the cross-border PS is directly generated by the local PS creator; or (b) it is generated converting “centrally” the local PS into the cross-border format. In both cases it is strongly suggested that a common underlying model for PS and eP/eD is used and that the local implementation is able to support the IDMP model for the product identification in both cases. Note: this section focuses on the product identification Clinical information (e.g. posology) associated to the medications is therefore not covered in this section even though essential in a Patient Summary. As known the mechanics adopted for generating a Patient Summary can strongly vary depending on the jurisdiction: PS as an outcome of a Clinical decision of a GP; PS as an automatic collection of data from one or more EHRs; mixed approaches etc. Therefore, the functional requirements to support this process can strongly change depending on the applied approach. The following requirements try to generalize as possible this multiplicity.