Home › Forums › Users › General User's Discussion ›

Change of Owner

Submitted by annaplatt on Mon, 18/04/2016 - 22:06
in

Hi - just wondering if someone can help me where I have gone wrong....

We have a family that comes to see us.  The son got a dog and initially it was put onto the Parent's file - not unusual.

So the son then wants to transfer the dog to his own file.

Not very hard, so we make up a new file for him and then edit the patient's information and close off his parents as owners and then make him the new owner....

Today the son rings up and wants to make the appointment for his dog.... 

So the nurse types in the first few letters of his surname and the initial of the dog's name

and two names come up both with dogs called King and both are active....

But then when you go to look at the Parents file they do not have King as an active patient....

So I am really confused as to why he comes up on the list when an appointment is being made..as we did not search for inactive patients and it clearly has the active box ticked.....

I have attached some screen shots of the various screens  as to why we are confused....

 

Also whilst I'm here since we updated to the latest version 1.8.1 I think, we have troubles finalising some invoices when a pet has been euthanased or died until we remove their pet tag number linked to their microchip. Once we remove that we can then finalise the invoice.

Thanks Anna

 

 

‹ Reports without email addresses in the results generated odt user fields ›

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Change of Owner

Submitted by tgething (not verified) on Tue, 19/04/2016 - 08:24.

Tim A - I just verified this bug under 1.9. That is, I moved the ownership of ZZ-Cat from White,Zed to White,Trilby and got this:

The patient is indeed still active, so the above display is correct.  The underlying problem is that the selection is not looking at the current owner.

As I see it there are 3 possibilities:

  1. leave things as is
  2. change to include only the current owner in the search
  3. leave search as is but add a Patient Current column

3 is probably the most useful fix.

Regards, Tim G

PS - Anna - I will respond to your "can't finalise invoices" separately.

Re: Change of Owner

Submitted by tanderson on Tue, 19/04/2016 - 09:24.

Raised as https://openvpms.atlassian.net/browse/OVPMS-1751

Re: Can't finalise invoice for dead patient

Submitted by tgething (not verified) on Tue, 19/04/2016 - 17:03.

Anna - I cannot duplicate this (on the 1.9 version I am running) and I need more information from you. What I did was:

  1. created invoice (for 1 can cat food) for patient ZZ Cat - left status as In-progress
  2. killed the cat (set deceased flag and set date deceased to yesterday)
  3. finalised invoice - no problems

Note that the cat has two identities: a microchip [but no pet tag we don't use them]; and an "Rx Works ID" - its patient number in the previous RxWorks system.

What was the error that occurred? Note that if you cannot remember then there should be something in the OpenVPMS.log file (in <Tomcat-Home>/logs/openvpms.log ).

Regards, Tim G

Re: Change of Owner

Submitted by annaplatt on Tue, 19/04/2016 - 23:54.

Hi Tim, thanks for your help.... so the transferring a patient is a bug- will it be sorted when we update to 1.9?

As far as the other issue - I had sent an email to Cath Colton and she narrowed it down to some patients having a pet tag which is associated with their microchip. Not many new patients have tags - they came across from our previous soft ware and never had been a problem til our recent upgrade. Once we deleted the pet tag from their identity we could then finalise the invoice.

I have attached the screen shot that I sent to Cath - but I'm not sure if you can read it. If not then tell me how to get to the Tom cat logs...

Thanks Anna

 

Displaying image004.png

AttachmentSize
message 2.png 62.32 KB
Message.png 62.32 KB

Re: Pet Tag problem

Submitted by tgething (not verified) on Wed, 20/04/2016 - 02:21.

OK Anna - I can (just) see from the pictures that the error is an archetypeRange failure - ie the identities include one that is not allowed. Since you 'fixed' the problem by deleting the pet tag identity, this implies that your party.patientPet archetype does not allow pet tags. If you use Administration|Archetypes to view the party.patientPet archetype and look for the identities node and then expand the this you should see:

To expand it, click on each of the red-dotted items in turn.

As you can see, identities has an archetypeRange validation which contains 3 descriptor.propertyMap's - and one of these specifies entityIdentity.petTag - ie one of the 3 identity types can be a petTag. (The other two are alias and microchip.)

I suspect that in your system these are set up differently - that is, I suspect that you are using a modified party.patientPet archetype and that things were not migrated correctly as part of your 1.8 to 1.8.1  (or 1.7 to 1.8.1) upgrade.

[Recall that it is perfectly proper to use customised archetypes (we have 34 of them) but when upgrading you need to be careful that you check your modified archetypes and if necessary edit them to suit the new OpenVPMS version.]

I suspect that your 'fails when we finalise the invoice' is due to the following chain of events:

  1. invoice contains item which changes the patient state (eg euthanase)
  2. when invoice is finalised, patient record is updated to set deceased flag and date
  3. this causes validation of patient record - which fails

That is - the problem is not the finalising as such - but rather the update of the patient record - and that if you simply edit a patient who has a petTag, (say to change its colour) then the same failure will occur.

Recommendation: ask the person who did the upgrade to 1.8.1 whether the above rings any bells.

Regards, Tim G

PS - as regards the "search finds old owners" problem - yes - Tim A has created the bug report and hopefully this will be one of the 'fixed in 1.9' problems.

Syndicate content