Introducing the Patient Visit Report

  • 2
  • Article
  • Updated 11 months ago
  • (Edited)
New in Front Desk version 16.9.12 is the Patient Visit Report as suggested by members of the Smartsoft Community Support Forum.

The Patient Visit Report is primarily used to find the average number of consultations practitioners are providing their patients per new episode.  This can be useful when trying to identify under or over servicing of patients by individual practitioners. 
 
Select Patient Visit from the Reports menu. 



The Patient Visit Report dialog will appear. 



This report is based on the billed items codes for a consultation.  Under the Initial Consult / Treatment section, select the date range and the initial consultation Item Code or Item Group to be used to identify the initial consultation for an episode.  Note that this selection must exclude item codes used for subsequent consultations. 



All patients who have had an initial consultation billed transaction within the dates and with the selected item code(s) will be included in the results.  Note that if a patient has had more than one initial consultation billed, indicating the start of treatment for an episode in this period, only the last episode will be for the report.  Further, it is important that the date range ends at some time prior to the date of the report, say 3 months prior, in order to provide time for patients to have their following subsequent consultations.

From the Subsequent Consult/Treatment section, select a subsequent consultation Item Code or Item Group



To only include transactions associated with a certain practitioner or group, select By Practice and the relevant Practice Group, Reporting Group or Practitioner.  

This report can be Printed, Previewed or Exported by clicking the respective buttons. 

The Summary version of the report will highlight the results of each practitioner allowing the Practice Manager to compare stats between them.



The detailed version will give greater insight by displaying each patient a practitioner has seen, allowing you to perform case studies and offer coaching for staff members to improve performance.



For more information on Item Groups and how to set them up, see this article: https://community.smartsoft.com.au/smartsoft/topics/introducing-reporting-groups-and-item-code-group...
Photo of Steven

Steven, Business Care

  • 244 Posts
  • 68 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 2
Photo of Rudi

Rudi

  • 26 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Great, thank you!
Photo of Adam Woolacott

Adam Woolacott

  • 49 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Ive been unable to get the report to work. Keep getting an error message 'there was a problem collecting data for the report'. Ive tried a large variety of options without success. Thanks.
Photo of Celia Young

Celia Young

  • 67 Posts
  • 22 Reply Likes
Yes me too.  I keep getting the same warning
Photo of Timothy

Timothy, Business Care Manager

  • 757 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
We are investigating this now and we will get back to you shortly. We certainly know that this is working for some clients and in our test environments.
(Edited)
Photo of Timothy

Timothy, Business Care Manager

  • 757 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
On investigation we have found that on some versions of Microsoft SQL Server this report is failing. For those users affected a new version of Front Desk will be available to download in the next 15 minutes.
Photo of Brenda Moncrieff

Brenda Moncrieff

  • 2 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Hi, we are unable to get accurate data for Medicare clients as the initial and subsequent item numbers are the same for a rebate to be paid - but the report only accepts a different item number for initial and then subsequent... ie clients for clinical psychology claim 80010 all visits... (we differentiate using sub categories for new/sub clients). Any suggestions or data accuracy please? Works fine for private health clients who claim item 100 initially, then 200 all subsequent visits. Thank you!
Photo of Timothy

Timothy, Business Care Manager

  • 757 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
Hi Brenda. This report provides an average number of consultations per episode, per practitioner. It should be considered an estimate, which is generally all that is required. 

There are two options in your case;
 
You could add a slightly different item code for the initial consult, perhaps 80010-I, and reserve 80010 (or 80010-S) for subsequent visits. In the item code setup window you can override the item sent to Medicare for claiming purposes where you can still use the 80010 item code for both the initial and subsequent consultation. 


 
Alternatively, you could exclude this set of patients from the report. If your treatment regime is the same for patients being billed under Medicare, then the average should not be affected.
Photo of Brandon Kam

Brandon Kam

  • 7 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
One thing I have noticed with this report, is that it only tracks subsequent visits with the same practitioner. There might be occasions where a patient has returned and seen another clinician and continued care with them. In this case, the patient visit report would not give the complete picture.

I wonder if there could be another feature added whereby any subsequent consultations billed at that item code with any practitioner could be tracked.
Photo of Andrew

Andrew, Community Manager

  • 344 Posts
  • 112 Reply Likes
Hi Brandon

You are right, in that the subsequent consultations included are only for the practitioner who provided the initial consult. The report by design provides a patient visit average per practitioner, as we feel it is less valuable to provide a patient visit average per practice.

I suggest what we could do is exclude patients that have had subsequent patients with another practitioner.  Ultimately we are looking to give an average so there is no need to include every patient if they are not 'typical'. What we need to balance is that at times patients may genuinely be seeing two practitioners in two different modalities, for example a physiotherapist and podiatrist. The way that it works now would track both modalities correctly.

We appreciate your thoughts on improving this new feature.
Photo of Heidi

Heidi

  • 18 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
If we change item codes to differ slightly for initial and subsequent appointments as suggested above:
1) would this only impact data going forward?
2) which of the codes would show on receipts (as if client is claiming from Medicare directly it would need the medicare code)?
Photo of Steven

Steven, Business Care

  • 244 Posts
  • 68 Reply Likes
1)If you change an item code, all the original transactions using the code remain intact, however on some reports the item code description may not appear (the code itself still will). This is why we recommended that you archive an item code and then create a new one for future use. This also requires you updating some of the defaults such as New Patient Item Code for your Medicare fee category for each Practitioner.

2)As long as the original item code is only slightly modified, so that it contains the original code, and the description is correct it should be fine to display on receipts and have manual claims processed. We suggest you modify the initial consult rather than the subsequent as it is used less often. Ultimately, it will be at the discretion of the Medicare clerk on the day, but we know this is used by other practices.

Alternately, you could exclude Medicare patients (initial consult and subsequent consult is the same) as you are trying to get an average, not a total number and they only form a subset of your client base., unless your practice is predominately Medicare based.
(Edited)
Photo of Heidi

Heidi

  • 18 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
We have the same issue as Brenda as our item codes are the same irrespective of initial or subsequent appointment but our appointment types do differ. We also have a clinic where one practitioner may do the assessment and another will provide the treatment.

If the functionality of this report could be expanded to allow selection of Appointment Types instead of item codes, with the choice to have services by any practitioner or a single practitioner counted that would get around both problems.
Photo of Steven

Steven, Business Care

  • 244 Posts
  • 68 Reply Likes
We can think about this.

Problem is, billed transactions have a higher level of truth then what is in the appointment book as some people archive or change previous appointments or don’t use the appointment book at all. In relation to all practitioners – the report is intended to be a patient visit average per practitioner, if a patient does see more than one practitioner during their course of treatment they probably need to be excluded as we are not looking for an average for the practice. Note that seeing a different ‘type’ of practitioner say a physiotherapist and a podiatrist at the same time, this would be looked at as a different episode and the system handles that now.
Photo of Heidi

Heidi

  • 18 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
There are so many variations of the way FrontDesk is used - I can only imagine the complexity of considering all the possible options.

We actually have the opposite problem to the above as our appointment book is more accurate than transactions/billing as at least 1/4 of all appointments in our clinic have no fee attached but need to be accounted for in our workload management and statistics.

On the per practitioner vs per patient issue, we are primarily interested in how many clients we retain and for how many visits (and their pathway through the service but that would be a nightmare of an IF statement to write).
Photo of Nathan Harten

Nathan Harten

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Like many on this thread we quite often have a different practitioner doing the initial as to those who do subsequent consultations. Why I like having the practitioner average, it would be great to have a "true" clinic average that looks at all the initials and their subsequent consultations with any practitioner.
Photo of Timothy

Timothy, Business Care Manager

  • 757 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
Hi Nathan. Thank you for your comments. We're certainly having a think about this. It is not easily possible to have a correct patient average without excluding patients that see multiple practitioners for the same episode. Note that we are looking at an average so excluding unreliable data only improves the accuracy of the average. 

As a suggestion, if you are after the clinic average, irrespective of who patients are seeing, you can:
  • Run the Billings Report between two date ranges (don't make the range too narrow).
  • Uncheck all 'Group By' filters (Schedule, Practitioner, Fee Category).
  • Export the report to Excel, summing all item codes related to initial consults and the same with subsequent consults, then divide total subsequent consults by initial consults.
Hope this helps for now!
Photo of Timothy

Timothy, Business Care Manager

  • 757 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
Hi all. Front Desk v18.1 includes improvements to the Patient Visit Report to allow users to consider subsequent appointments booked with any practitioner. 



Please note that v18.1 also includes the new billing engine, so it is important that you familiarise yourself with information in the Front Desk Accounting Update January 2018 document prior to updating your system.

Software upgrades can be downloaded from the support section of the Smartsoft website.