I'm not sure this would work for you, but I frequently use terminology like: evidence of DVT or findings suggestive of DVT. That way I can avoid language like: DVT present or positive for DVT. It's all symantics, but perhaps that might work in some facilities.
From: UVM Flownet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McGonnell, Gerald
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 16:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: preliminary reports
Thank you for starting this Marcella.
This department presently places a note on the chart for inpatients, and
we call the referring physician for outpatients and that states 'DVT
Present in ... vessel, or No DVT present'. All notes indicate that it
is the Vascular Technologist making this determination and that the
physician's interpretation will follow.
We have been told that in this department we will no longer have the
ability to state that a DVT is present or not present. We will need to
use language such as 'The CFV and Fem Vein have echogenic filling and
reduced flow' or 'the CFV and femoral vein have no echogenic filling and
normal flows', but not to go as far as stating the presence of or
absence of DVT.
If anyone uses this type of preliminary reporting I would appreciate
hearing from you to get your advice on how to implement this type of
system. Thank you.
Mercy Medical Center
To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to: