Dual file access

Not infrequently we get the annoying error where someone has just entered the patient history(notes) after a consult and on apply/ok the whole lot is deleted because 'the file may be in use by another user'. Is it possible to prevent this from happening - either a warning or total lock out of editing by a second user?

Cheers,

Nick

Comment viewing options

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

Re: Dual file access

Hi Nick,Sorry for the late reply.Currently when someone is editing a particular visit /invoice  (anything) we don't "lock" the record and then if someone else tries to edit it tell them it is in use.  The protection against over writing someone else's changes is when you save the record where it will reject the changes if the system notices the information has changed since you started editing it.    Essentially the first person to save the information wins approach. To be honest we decided to use this approach as it was easiest to implement and we had no evidence that it was a major issue although we definitely recognise  when it does happen it is painful.  One alternative is to lock the record on edit but this has it's own issues.  Specifically someone can leave an editing screen up or just close a browser or disconnect their PC/workstation and that will effectively block everyone out of the information.  This has been an issue with a number of software packages and generally means someone has to run around and find the screen editing the information and cancel it in order to enter information on a customer or patient. Not an ideal solution. The alternative we have considered is if a conflict is found try and merge the two versions of the information.  May be tricky depending on the nature of the changes i.e changing the same notes in a visit versus adding different medical record entries. A common alternative with web applications is to maintain some kind of locking mechanism that times out.  Again possible but would require a reasonable amount of development.While we ponder and decide on the best approach there may be some things you can do to limit the occurrence of the issue.  Firstly it would good to identify the scenarions that are most likely to cause the issue.  I.e under what circumstances two people edit the same visit.  Maybe some procedural changes may minimise the issue.  If you could relay this information back to us it will help us design a solution that has minimal impact on the rest of the application. What may also help is to make sure you use Apply to save the information as you editing so you limit the impact of a potential lock.  Habitually hit Apply if for any reason you need to leave the workstation and are in the process of editing an invoice or visit. The development team will work on a more permanent solution :-)CheersTony  On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:42 AM, <paradisevets@internode.on.net> wrote:

Not infrequently we get the annoying error where someone has just entered the patient history(notes) after a consult and on apply/ok the whole lot is deleted because 'the file may be in use by another user'. Is it possible to prevent this from happening - either a warning or total lock out of editing by a second user?

Cheers, Nick _______________________________________________ OpenVPMS User Mailing List users@lists.openvpms.org To unsubscribe or change your subscription visit: //lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users" target="_blank">http://lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users Posts from this mailing list can be viewed online and replied to in the OpenVPMS User's forum- //tinyurl.com/openvfu" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/openvfu

-- ______________________________________________________________________Principal ConsultantVertical Connect Pty LtdPhone :  +61 (0) 3 97229824Mobile:  +61 (0) 4 21347105 Email   :  tony@verticalconnect.netWeb    :  //www.verticalconnect.net">http://www.verticalconnect.net

Dual File Access

Hi Tony,

90% of the time is when the consulting vet has finished invoicing and the receptionist is receipting they, for some reason, need to add a client note or comment relating to the visit - if they do this it stops the vet from saving the history that they are usually entering at the same time. It occurs enough to be annoying as there are usually long histories resulting from a visit that get lost.

 

Cheers

 

Nick

Re: Dual File Access

Hi guys, This is not the first time we have considered this issue. Whilst our nurses are supposed to not receipt a client until the scheduled appointment changes to "billed" we do get this also. The other time is when two vets bring up a consult at the same time. One vet calls in the client. Unknowingly their history taking is going to get lost.

Locking is a fraught issue. Merging two sets of changes seems attractive to the end user but it can be tough to develop. The worst thing to lose is a whole bunch of text right? I type slow and every clinical record is a work of art that can't be repeated. It is a crime to lose them. But what if instead of just losing the records OpenVPMS took you back to your edit screen? In that way, at least the history can be copied (Ctl-A, Ctl-C) and then pasted (Ctl-V) into the medical record.

Lastly, a technical question to Tony/Tim. Is it only because a user could delete a visit while the other person is adding a record to it that this locking exists? Simultaneous additions of medical records should not be an issue given they are unique anyway. What if the locking occurred at the medical record level rather then at the level of the visit? Would this decrease the frequency of this issue? I do copy (Ctl-V) long histories sometimes... just in case...

Cheers, Matt C

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:38:18 +0000 (UTC), paradisevets@internode.on.net

wrote:

> Hi Tony, > 90% of the time is when the consulting vet has finished invoicing and the > receptionist is receipting they, for some reason, need to add a client > note or comment relating to the visit - if they do this it stops the vet > from saving the history that they are usually entering at the same time. > It occurs enough to be annoying as there are usually long histories > resulting from a visit that get lost. >   > Cheers >   > Nick > _______________________________________________ > OpenVPMS User Mailing List > users@lists.openvpms.org > To unsubscribe or change your subscription visit: > http://lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users > Posts from this mailing list can be viewed online and replied to in the > OpenVPMS User's forum- http://tinyurl.com/openvfu >

_______________________________________________ OpenVPMS User Mailing List users@lists.openvpms.org To unsubscribe or change your subscription visit: http://lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users Posts from this mailing list can be viewed online and replied to in the OpenVPMS User's forum- http://tinyurl.com/openvfu

Dual file access

Hi Matt and Nick,

I agree it would be annoying so it needs to be addressed.  

In regards what we lock unfortunately we currently edit visits and even if the actual visit information doesn't change the medical records attached to the visit do so the relationships in the visit need to be updated and saved.  I think it would take significant effort to change the way this operates.  Also from what Nick is saying you cannot guarantee that someone may not try and edit the same medcial record entry i.e notes.

Tim and I will put our thinking caps on to see what is feasible and discuss the options on the forums.  I would say that this would need to take priority over other issues in the 1.5 release ?

Cheers

Tony

 

 

Re: Dual file access

More of an annoyance then a burning issue for us but if there is enough interest in having it improved and the $ to do it, we would be happy to contribute a portion. Matt C

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 22:03:39 +0000 (UTC), tony@openvpms.org wrote:

> Hi Matt and Nick, > I agree it would be annoying so it needs to be addressed.   > In regards what we lock unfortunately we currently edit visits and even if

> the actual visit information doesn't change the medical records attached to

> the visit do so the relationships in the visit need to be updated and > saved.  I think it would take significant effort to change the way this > operates.  Also from what Nick is saying you cannot guarantee that > someone may not try and edit the same medcial record entry i.e notes. > Tim and I will put our thinking caps on to see what is feasible and discuss

> the options on the forums.  I would say that this would need to take > priority over other issues in the 1.5 release ? > Cheers > Tony >   >   > _______________________________________________ > OpenVPMS User Mailing List > users@lists.openvpms.org > To unsubscribe or change your subscription visit: > http://lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users > Posts from this mailing list can be viewed online and replied to in the > OpenVPMS User's forum- http://tinyurl.com/openvfu >

_______________________________________________ OpenVPMS User Mailing List users@lists.openvpms.org To unsubscribe or change your subscription visit: http://lists.openvpms.org/listinfo/users Posts from this mailing list can be viewed online and replied to in the OpenVPMS User's forum- http://tinyurl.com/openvfu

Losing Histories

Sandra @ Bellarine

 Hi,

Thismorning I added this as a new topic, and Tony pointed me in the direction of this discussion. This is a big issue for us as the vets often charge the client and then go back to do the hx so that the client is free to go. My post is copied below:

Losing Histories:

Our vets have had a problem losing hx's. This happens if they do a consult, and rather than typing up the long hx and keep the client waiting they bill it and then the client goes to the front desk to pay. The receptionist may sell some more products eg; worm tabs that appear on the hx. The vet in the meantime is in the consult room typing up a nice long detailed hx. When he goes to save the hx he gets a message similar to "failed to save visit". They seem to think this only happens when the receptionist sells the client a product that is listed on the client medical records (hx)

Sandra.

 

Syndicate content