Referral Orders: Internal vs External, Internal do not print on the req, and External will count against us. If you select Internal for the service provider it forces you to select from the drop down list in the EMR, this does not print on the req, nor would it give the patient any useful information such as address and phone number if it did. If we list it as External which we will until you can fix this, it will count against us. in our numbers. We want a way to identify the provider at the go set up settings orders service provider level as internal or external. SPR 59286 logged for this issue.
We have reported this issue as well. We are trying to figure out if we can add the internal provider to our printed requisition, but that has been a challenge because we are having trouble finding a data element. We have also created a quick text for each internal provider that has their name, address and phone number, so it can be added to the comment/note portion of the referral and then be visible to know who the referral is going to. We have an issue also that all of our internal providers are listed in our service providers listing and we are worried about people being confused and choosing the internal provider from the external provider list and then causing an issue with our MU reports. Unfortunately you can inactivate an entry on the service providers list if there is a referral order for that provider, so we are trying to figure out a way to indicate to a user not to use the internal providers. GE had suggested we put ZZ in front of the last name and then it would move it to the bottom of the list, but if anyone prints out a referral requisition with that provider's name on it, the ZZ will be there as well and that was an issue for us. No easy solutions here, but it would be nice to at least get the name to print on the requisition.
Dawn Nee
Hallmark Health
Dawn,
The issue about not being able to remove a service provider should be another ticket.... what a pain that is. We have put Obsolete in front of the ones that our users aren't "supposed" to use. Good suggestion about the quick text; but we shouldn't have to come up with a work-around for something that should work correctly in the first place.
ps (SR) #1-588276164 is the case I just opened about the inability to remove obsoleted service providers. They will probably say I need to submit an enhancement request but if enough people complain or request to be added to the ticket, we might get somewhere.
Our site was added to the open spr CISDB00052887.
Dawn Duschel
UAP Clinic