2024/06/12 - Release Notes epi-me (eAdmissions release)

NEW FEATURES

PATIENT PORTAL

Revamp of 'Header Questions' on Adult Health History Pages 1 and 2 (EM-6858 & EM-6859, Helpdesk #23337)

EpiSoft is excited to launch a 'version 2' of the Header Question version of the Adult Health History pages 1 and 2 which were originally released in December 2020.

Please contact help@episoft.com.au or lodge a ticket via EpiSoft Helpdesk if you would like to get started with epi-me's Header Questions forms.

The V2 Header Questions have the following behaviour which still has the same efficiency benefits for the User, but is more clinically safe than the original version:

1. If Users respond 'No' to the Header Question at the top of the body system sections, all child questions show visible and set to No (as per V1). However, the child questions remain editable and NOT disabled.

2. If the User sets the Header Question to 'Yes' at the top of the section, all child questions continue to show visible and are set to blank (as per V1).

3. If the User has the Header Question set to 'No' (hence all of the child questions are set to No as per 1) but then they change one child question to Yes, this should set the Header Question to Yes but the responses to the other child questions remain unchanged.

4. Subsequently to scenario 3, if the User then reverts the Header Question back to 'No', then all the child questions should reset to No (as per scenario 1).

5. After responding 'Yes' to the Header Question (scenario 2), if the User then ticks 'No' to all the child questions, then the Header Question is automatically overridden to 'No' to match.


Read me:

A. As per V1, these have been developed as a 'custom' page so any further customers wishing to use this feature will require a migration exercise to ensure their questions on the Standard Adult page are replicated on the Custom Header Question page.

B. The Header Questions only apply to Adult eAdmissions at this point in time (i.e to the exclusion of Paediatric patients)

C. For any eAdmissions commenced prior to the introduction of the Header Questions, they will continue to see the original 'standard' Adult Health History pages 1 and 2 without the Header Questions. This means it is very likely the healthcare provider will receive eAdmissions on the standard questionnaire post release of the Header Questions for a transitory period of time.




'Header Question' version of Adult Health History page 1 - added configurable instructions at the top of the page (EM-7441, Helpdesk #23337)

Dynamic Text ID 97 - 'Custom instruction text at top of first page of health history when the page includes summary (header) questions' has been added to enable healthcare providers to configure their own text, images, video etc. (any HTML content) to appear at the start of the Health History form using Header Questions.

The envisioned initial use-case is to explain to the Patient Portal User why Header Questions have been introduced and how they work, however they can be flexibly used for other purposes such as a video about the Health History form or a prompt about what the Patient Portal User might need to complete it.





Admission Details page - Admitting Dr search - enhanced instructions to improve usability (EM-7541)

Multiple customers were reporting that Patient Portal Users often do not read the instructions on the Admitting Dr search and were entering in 'Dr XX' or their Dr's first name, resulting in a failure to find their Admitting Dr and User frustration and patient support calls.

To mitigate this, EpiSoft has formatted the key instructions in red text and have also included the syntax for the search term in the search field itself as hint text.




Personal Details page - new Form Configuration to relabel Patient sex to 'Patient sex at birth' (EM-6978)

This occurs subject to the TRUE setting of PERSONAL_DETAILS_SEX_RELABEL .



GP Details page - Regular GP & Referring Dr search - enhanced instructions to improve usability (EM-7673)

As per Admitting Dr search enhancements two items above, Patient Portal Users also had similar issues on the Regular GP and Referring Dr search (NOTE: Regular GP and Referring Dr Search is only applicable if the Form Configurations GP_DETAILS_INCLUDE_SEARCH and GP_DETAILS_INCLUDE_OTHER_REFERRER are to TRUE, respectively).


Similar formatting enhancements have been made to these search fields.






GP Details page - rewording of notifying GP of discharge question if patient has no regular GP (EM-7597)

This change is only relevant to healthcare providers using the TRUE setting of the GP_DETAILS_INCLUDE_NOTIFY_GP Form Configuration.

When addressing the bug fix to make No Regular GP and Referring Dr questions compatible (see bottom of release notes), EpiSoft has also identified that if the patient has no regular GP, then then there is no point asking if a GP can be notified about the patient’s admission and discharge.

Instead, the Referring Dr is the relevant party that could be notified.

Thus, if the patient has no regular GP, the question is reworded to 'Can we notify your Referring Dr of your admission and discharge?'


Allergies & Medications pages (Adult & Paediatric, and 'all optional' page version) - screen for GLP1RA injectables eg. Ozempic (EM-7305, Helpdesk #33853)

It has been reported that some patients are not reporting their use of a class of drugs (GLP-1 receptor agonists [GLP1RAs] eg. Ozempic), or reporting them too late prior to admission. Of these patients, there is a small proportion who have surgery and experience an adverse event when under anaesthetic.

To assist with detecting these patients, the existing diabetes medications question (which is controlled by the TRUE setting of HISTORY_MEDS_INCLUDE_DIABETES & HISTORY_MEDS_PAEDS_INCLUDE_DIABETES for Adult and Paediatric, respectively) has been expanded to include common GLP1RA injectables.




In addition, a new Clinical Alert called 'High Risk Medications' has been added to migrate the functionality that the DIabetes alert had for this Diabetes Medications question to allow healthcare providers to subscribe to be alerted for Diabetes patients or patients on high risk medications (with the initial use-case of common diabetic medications and GLP1RA injectables), or both.

More info about these two different Clinical Alerts is available here.


BUG FIXES:

PATIENT PORTAL

GP Details page - using 'No regular GP' functionality was incompatible with Other Referring Dr (EM-2167, Helpdesk #10216)

Previously, customers could not use both GP_DETAILS_INCLUDE_NO_REGULAR_GP and GP_DETAILS_INCLUDE_OTHER_REFERRER simultaneously.

This scenario is becoming increasingly popular with customers as patients may not have a regular GP but do require to be referred to their Admitting Dr by another healthcare provider ("Referring Dr").

Now, if a User ticks 'No regular GP', they will then be forced to provide a Referring Dr.




Paediatric Health History Page 1 - Date hospitalised for asthma erroneously showed on the Paediatric Health History even if child hasn't been hospitalised (EM-5987)

Previously, Users were forced to provide a hospitalisation date regardless of whether the paediatric patient had been hospitalised for asthma or not.





Discharge Planning (Adult) page - Name of the person staying with you for the first 24 hours post procedure (if different to the person escorting you home)? should be optional IF User is asked about person taking day-patient home (EM-6024)

NOTE: This scenario only applies to day-only patients.

This question has two different interpretations depending on whether the User is asked about the person taking the day-patient home (controlled by the HISTORY_DISCH_INCLUDE_QUESTION_RE_PERSON_DRIVING_HOME Form Configuration).

The working assumption of the healthcare provider reading the User's response is that if it is blank, then the person escorting the patient home is also staying with them for the first 24 hours, so the validation logic has been updated accordingly.


ADMIN PORTAL

Admission Worklist - Internal eAdmissions - cannot select patients with a middle name on Patient Search where PERSONAL_DETAILS_INCLUDE_MIDDLE_NAME_MANDATORY is TRUE (EM-6835)

This only affects one customer using the Form Configuration PERSONAL_DETAILS_INCLUDE_MIDDLE_NAME_MANDATORY but they are not yet using the Internal eAdmissions feature.

The Patient Search button on Internal eAdmissions did not work for patients with a middle name.