Hi, To help in improving adoption of the system especially clinical, a canned report is required that could give number of times filled for all the specified forms. The usage could be shown by splitting monthly in a date range.
An output sample is attached.
Picking up which forms to show can be a configuration. Similarly whether to show monthly or daily could also be configuration. Either in this report or another one, having a split of counts by provider name is also useful. Uploading…
So, if I understand you correctly, you would like a report which shows : Obs Form Name | No. of times filled (one-col-per-month)
For instance:
TB Form | 250 | 200 | 175 Diabetes | 150 | 100 | 125
Is there a report for “Primary/Secondary Diagnosis” that could instead give this data? Or creating a report based on filled forms would be more useful?
Yes. the format looks correct. Diagnosis and Forms are disconnected. So a diagnosis report won’t give this data.
As an aside, the first time I implemented a feature like this in another OpenMRS system, I was immediately asked to break it down by provider. They wanted to use this to look at (a) one a provider’s historical performance, (b) providers listed against each other in the current week/month.
(I’m not saying to add this as a requirement, nor am I saying this is a good way to measure provider performance, just sharing the experience.)
Thanks for sharing Darius. Its an important point you bring up. i have had similar experience in other past code practices consulting engagements. As an example, I have seen people adding unnecessary tests just to add coverage as it was used to measure their performance. So yes, this is a common pitfall of quantitative metrics. I think the caveat here is that such metrics should never be seen, understood or aimed at in isolation and absoluteness. It should always be coupled with other metrics/discussions (quantitative or qualitative) and should be treated as an aid at improving a commonly understood and agreed behaviour. I have been using the forms report regularly using custom queries at the implementation i am at but with continuous discussions and understanding of context. The counts are not used to measure anyone’s performance but are really helpful in having concrete discussions. Not just leadership but people on grounds have agreed to regularly look at these numbers. Its a double edged sword!