Fwd: Should EMRs warn about drug warnings and recalls?

[Jim Busser]

The following brief discussion led to the suggestion (at bottom) that FreeDiams consider some explicit awareness of whether drugs have been recalled.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Jim Busser <james....@ubc.ca>
> Date: September 3, 2011 2:47:10 PM PDT
> To: GNUmed list <Gnumed...@gnu.org>
> Subject: Should EMRs warn about drug warnings and recalls?
>
> I have not used an EMR sufficiently to have experienced alerts fatigue.
>
> Some of this may be nicely handled by extrnal tools such as FreeDIams. Even so, at minimum, if a drug has been taken off the market on account of being dangerous (if not illegal) it may be advisable for the EMR itself to assist to
>
> (a) issue no new prescriptions and
> (b) avise patients to stop taking it
>
> Such notices and warnings could occur at the level of the "brand" or at the level of the "substance".
>
> When the focus of a recall is restricted to the brand-level (not affecting other supplies), something would be wrong with their quality control or sabotage etc.
>
> Substance-wise warnings will arise from issues with
> - the substance "inherently" or
> - some function of dosage (DDD) or drug or disease interactions
>
> Therefore is there any useful concept of storing within GNUmed a substance and a Brand
>
> availability / status / flag
>
> where the default is null (normal) and possible alternate values could include:
>
> withdrawn
> caution
> restricted
>
> which reminds me that I wondered whether the concept "is_approved_of" should live only in substance_intake or whether it makes sense to have a default in
>
> consumable_substance
>
> which can be overridden at the patient level?
>
> -- Jim

(the suggestion was:)

I also think FreeDiams should gain explicit understanding of
recall - it needn't be complicated but it should be there.
Maybe that issue should be raised on the FreeDiams list ?

(Surely, their implementation may need three-value logic:

.is_recalled:
True - explicit recall
False - we know the source delivers reliable recall status
None - we don't know
)

-- Jim

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:59:53AM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:

> The following brief discussion led to the suggestion (at
> bottom) that FreeDiams consider some explicit awareness of
> whether drugs have been recalled.

...

> (the suggestion was:)
>
> I also think FreeDiams should gain explicit understanding of
> recall - it needn't be complicated but it should be there.
> Maybe that issue should be raised on the FreeDiams list ?
>
> (Surely, their implementation may need three-value logic:
>
> .is_recalled:
> True - explicit recall
> False - we know the source delivers reliable recall status

(and thereby can assertively say: "No, this drug is currently
not recalled.")

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

[Eric MAEKER]

Le 4 sept. 2011 à 20:33, Karsten Hilbert a écrit :

> On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:59:53AM -0700, Jim Busser wrote:
>
>> The following brief discussion led to the suggestion (at
>> bottom) that FreeDiams consider some explicit awareness of
>> whether drugs have been recalled.
>
> ...
>
>> (the suggestion was:)
>>
>> I also think FreeDiams should gain explicit understanding of
>> recall - it needn't be complicated but it should be there.
>> Maybe that issue should be raised on the FreeDiams list ?
>>
>> (Surely, their implementation may need three-value logic:
>>
>> .is_recalled:
>> True - explicit recall
>> False - we know the source delivers reliable recall status
>
> (and thereby can assertively say: "No, this drug is currently
> not recalled.")

Ok this was added to the future 0.7.0 roadmap (since the 0.6.0 roadmap is closed) and will be discussed later.

Thanks
-----
Eric Maeker, MD (Fr)
http://www.freemedforms.com
http://www.ericmaeker.fr