Has anyone else experienced this?

[NedB]

Whichever entity made the arrangements for the takeover should have made arrangements about the medical records also. That said, your best bet is a one-on-one meeting between the chief techs of the two organizations. Hopefully Blood Banking ideals will triumph.

[Malcolm Needs ☆]

Actually I think what MACWHC has stated is totally realistic. The more cluttered a data-base becomes, the greater the risk of error. I want data extracted of patients with known antibodies.....not the rest.

We have enough problems with trying to reduce duplication on our own patient records, importing data that is difficult to link will cause even more confusion. How would you create a merged patient file of same name, dob with six different patient record numbers?

Ideally there would be one single system throughout the country (but that's not going to be achieved before I retire), that would sort this out to some extent.

Which one wil sort it out Rashmi?

A single system or you retiring (remeber, you've just had yet another birthday???????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SORRY; COULDN'T RESIST IT (BUT SHOULD HAVE DONE)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Malcolm Needs ☆]

So.......... now we're going to be sued for information we don't have because a patient sought treatment else where.

Nonsense!!!

Sorry Malcolm but this is an issue you and eric will find no support from me.

Then, on this point John, we must agree to disagree, but the thread has certainly brought about some lively discussion and identified the fact that there are (at least) two schools of thought on the subject, with each school adhering to their own ideas on the subject in an equally rigorous manner.

[Brenda K Hutson]

Well, nice as that sounds, I have no doubt that the previous Management does realize the critical nature of Blood Bank data; they are after all, a Hospital. That is why this goes back to my initial question in posting this thread: is there some regulatory issue here that would keep them from being able to do it, because otherwise, it seems like a lose-lose situation (we don't have the data when the new Hospital opens this Sunday, and they will be getting numerous requests from us, one by one). Just FYI: turns out our Pathology Dept. ran into the same problem with them, wanting results of previous anatomic pathology reports, and being told NO.

Brenda

[eric1980]

Then, on this point John, we must agree to disagree, but the thread has certainly brought about some lively discussion and identified the fact that there are (at least) two schools of thought on the subject, with each school adhering to their own ideas on the subject in an equally rigorous manner.

Malcom, my sentiments exaclty!!!!!!! The keywords in my mind is "school of thoughts"!!! If you are right here before me, I'm gonna buy you a latte!

[eric1980]

Well, nice as that sounds, I have no doubt that the previous Management does realize the critical nature of Blood Bank data; they are after all, a Hospital. That is why this goes back to my initial question in posting this thread: is there some regulatory issue here that would keep them from being able to do it, because otherwise, it seems like a lose-lose situation (we don't have the data when the new Hospital opens this Sunday, and they will be getting numerous requests from us, one by one). Just FYI: turns out our Pathology Dept. ran into the same problem with them, wanting results of previous anatomic pathology reports, and being told NO.

Brenda

I can't help but feel that it's not the BBers or the lab people of the departing management who refuse to share medical records, but is the top management of the departing hospital who refused to.

But why is it so, we can only guess.