Animal Registry Registration changes
Hi All,
Recently we have been requested to add a new field to the Microchip/Animal Registration forms so they adhere to new Victorian and Queensland legislation. The Forms now need to include a Source No (VIC) or Breeder No (QLD) which I believe represents the registered supplier/breeder of the patient being registered.
Obvioulsy, without some place to store this, these would need to be added manually to the form post printing or via a Form prompt in OpenVPMS.
Should we be looking to add this as a new field to the patient details or maybe to the Microchip information for the patient ?
Cheers
Tony
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
My preference would be to:
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
There is no requirement in QLD to store this information. In fact, it's so poorly implemented doing anything at this point is premature.
1. Almost every dog I see doesnt have 1 - if they are purchased in nsw they dont need to -
2. Any dog that I implant wont have one because the owner doesnt know it or isnt forthcoming - when I contacted the department they just said dont record it.
Finally its a requirement when lodging the data in the microchip registries - not for vets to record.
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
I'll be honest I think the process of sending forms to registries via email or post has a few years left at best - we have already migrated to using a completely online system. Personally I would love to see a plugin that auto registers a pet with databases.
I certainly wouldn't invest development dollars into this sort of thing unless the reason was more than breeder numbers and source numbers.
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
Hi Ben,
I definitely agree that electronic lodgement is definitely the preference and I believe there may be an offering in the wings that will do this and integrate with OpenVPMS.
This was only a interim solution to solve a problem I had with one of my sites which may be requested by more sites once the registries start propogating their updated forms. I have implemented this at the site in question and it works well but wanted to see if others agreed with the approach. :-)
Cheers
Tony
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
Speaking as a Victorian where we are yet to see if this will work or die the way the Qld initiative did,
Tims proposed solution would meet our requirements but from an effiiciency point of view, it would be better to add the source ID at the same time as the microchip. This does not exclude it being an identity...
Online registration would be super.
Cheers
Matt
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
Obviously people should be able to store whatever data they need too however they want.
Playing devils advocate tho - here is my question - apart from needing to be added to the original microchip registration - when will a vet practice need to know an animals source id.
My argument would be that the only time I would want to store this is NOT on an animals detail but as a id for an owner - ie a foster carer or breeder - so when I implant chips for them the field would be retreivable.
Ie it would be a client identifier not an animal.
Re: Animal Registry Registration changes
Yep.
I can see this usecase being applicable for us.
I wish we could upvote comments on this forum :-)
Matt