Overlap between certain pieces of equipment and consumables

[joehcollins]

As discussed with the team at the '23 Q4 meeting there is some overlap between items defined as consumables and those defined as equipment in PR #1124. Joe, Tim H and Eva are too meet and make an initial decision on these relevant consumables.

In addition, some equipment within the list appears to be consumable (single use, i.e. nasal prongs) and should be considered as a consumable.

[joehcollins]

Currently this is an issue for:

• Oxygen (ALRI, RTI, Labour)
• Pulse oximetry (ALRI)
• Vacuum extractor (Labour)
• Urine dipstick (Care of women during pregnancy)
• Cytoscope (bladder cancer) - only in consumable availability sheet
• Endoscope (oesophageal cancer) - only in consumable availability sheet

[joehcollins]

I've had a first pass through the equipment list and had a go highlighting any issues (i.e. single use, already a consumable). I dont think this is complete yet as I havent gone through the consumable list itself to see the overlap from that spreadsheet.

Have sent you the google doc with equipment issues highlighted. (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VpH1qNb8wZ-s7XjQNmsrYjhQ2ick3reivfV8_BCDyoU/edit#gid=0)

[EvaJanouskova]

Hi @tdm32, Is there any overlap of equipment and consumables, or equipment logged as consumables, or consumables logged as equipment in your modules (epi, hiv, malaria, measles, schisto, tb)?

[tdm32]

Hi @tdm32, Is there any overlap of equipment and consumables, or equipment logged as consumables, or consumables logged as equipment in your modules (epi, hiv, malaria, measles, schisto, tb)?

Hi Eva, I'm not sure off-hand. I don't think so. Do you have any master lists compiled of all equipment requested by modules to cross-check?

[EvaJanouskova]

think so. Do you have any master lists compiled of all equipment requested by modules to cross-check?

Hi @tdm32, Is there any overlap of equipment and consumables, or equipment logged as consumables, or consumables logged as equipment in your modules (epi, hiv, malaria, measles, schisto, tb)?

Hi Eva, I'm not sure off-hand. I don't think so. Do you have any master lists compiled of all equipment requested by modules to cross-check?

Hi @tdm32, here is a spreadsheet with all sets (including empty sets) logged with your modules by event_name and treatment_id:
equipment_summary_TarasModules__module_name_event_name_treatment_id__5y_20Kpop_10runs_1draw.csv

[tdm32]

@EvaJanouskova Thanks so much for compiling this list of equipment - it made things very easy for me to check.

So the only 2 potential issues I can spot are:

1. X-ray for TB. The resourcefile intervention package which is required has item "X-ray". I assume this includes just the xray films. Separately, we have listed equipment for this as the xray machine and xray viewer. If my assumption is correct, then this is all fine.

2. Measles treatment for associated pneumonia. Consumables requirements are "oxygen primarily with oxygen cylinders". This is a bit ambiguous, but I took this to mean the oxygen and the cylinders (plus concentrators) are included as equipment. I think it would be good to align this with the assumptions in the pneumonia module.

Thanks so much!

[EvaJanouskova]

Decisions made within a meeting (Tim H, Joe, Eva; see notes from the meeting):

• Oxygen as both consumable and equipment
• Pulse oximeter as both consumable and equipment
• Vacuum extractor as both consumable and equipment
• Cystoscope as both consumable and equipment (currently only as equip; as Cytoscope in ResourceFile_consumables_matched but not in ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages) -- update for bladder cancer
• Endoscope as both consumable and equipment (currently only in ResourceFile_consumables_matched, but not in ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages nor in ResourceFile_Equipment) -- update for oesphageal cancer
• Urine dip stick as consumable (already added as consumable; @tbhallett, does it mean that we also want to remove this from the ResourceFile_Equipment and leave it only in the consumables RF?) - If to be removed, check with Newton what to do about item numbering, is it already in use? If so, better just to have a gap between item nmbs. Otherwise, it could be renumbered.
• Nasal Prongs do not model at all (@tbhallett, but we can leave this in ResourceFile_Equipment for future reference if it's of interest, is that so?) - If to be removed, check with Newton what to do about item numbering, is it already in use? If so, better just to have a gap between item nmbs. Otherwise, it could be renumbered.
• Prostate specific antigen test as consumable (currently in ResourceFile_consumables_matched but not in ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages)

see also the spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VpH1qNb8wZ-s7XjQNmsrYjhQ2ick3reivfV8_BCDyoU/edit?usp=sharing

@tbhallett, promised

• to look at the issue regarding ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_and_usage, and ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages: item codes mixed-up
• to figure out if ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_and_usage should/could be of use or if it is too outdated

[EvaJanouskova]

Hi @sakshimohan, as you can see above, we are missing some consumables in the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages: Cystoscope , Endoscope, and Prostate specific antigen test, all three are included in the ResourceFile_consumables_matched but with the matching_status Not matched (Cystoscope is there with a typo, ie as Cytoscope). What should be now the correct approach if we like to include these into the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages?

[EvaJanouskova]

@tbhallett, I am not sure now if the mix-up with the item code 280 (diazepam/endoscope) was sorted out? If so, how exactly?

[EvaJanouskova]

• to figure out if ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_and_usage should/could be of use or if it is too outdated

@tbhallett and @sakshimohan, Is it so that the ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_and_usage is not currently utilised, and the correct consumable lists to identify consumable names that may be useful are the ResourceFile_LMIS_2018 and ResourceFile_consumables_matched?

[sakshimohan]

Hi @sakshimohan, as you can see above, we are missing some consumables in the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages: Cystoscope , Endoscope, and Prostate specific antigen test, all three are included in the ResourceFile_consumables_matched but with the matching_status Not matched (Cystoscope is there with a typo, ie as Cytoscope). What should be now the correct approach if we like to include these into the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages?

Hi @EvaJanouskova. Sorry for a late response on this. Thanks for pointing me to the three consumables which need to be added. The reason that the matching_status states Not matched is because neither the LMIS nor HHFA contain data on their availability. However, we made some assumptions on their availability based on 'expert opinion' as shown in the data summarised from ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_small.csv below for 280 (Endoscope), 281 (Prostate specific antigen), 285 (Cystoscope).

Just to confirm, is the suggestion that we drop these from the consumable availability file? I can push this update this afternoon.

If instead we wish to continue treating cystoscope and endoscope as consumables, I can add code to generate_consumables_item_codes_and_packages.py to generate these and add them to ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages.csv.

[EvaJanouskova]

Hi @sakshimohan, as you can see above, we are missing some consumables in the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages: Cystoscope , Endoscope, and Prostate specific antigen test, all three are included in the ResourceFile_consumables_matched but with the matching_status Not matched (Cystoscope is there with a typo, ie as Cytoscope). What should be now the correct approach if we like to include these into the ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages?

Hi @EvaJanouskova. Sorry for a late response on this. Thanks for pointing me to the three consumables which need to be added. The reason that the matching_status states Not matched is because neither the LMIS nor HHFA contain data on their availability. However, we made some assumptions on their availability based on 'expert opinion' as shown in the data summarised from ResourceFile_Consumables_availability_small.csv below for 280 (Endoscope), 281 (Prostate specific antigen), 285 (Cystoscope).

Just to confirm, is the suggestion that we drop these from the consumable availability file? I can push this update this afternoon.

If instead we wish to continue treating cystoscope and endoscope as consumables, I can add code to generate_consumables_item_codes_and_packages.py to generate these and add them to ResourceFile_Consumables_Items_and_Packages.csv.

Hi @sakshimohan, We want to have Cystoscope and Endoscope as both consumable and equipment, while the Prostate specific antigen test we want to be consumable only, see here.

[EvaJanouskova]

Hi @sakshimohan, I'll answer your question here, so @joehcollins and @tbhallett could correct/complete what I write.
The question from Sakshi is:

Could you also please clarify why we've decided to treat cystoscope and endoscope and both consumable and equipment? Sorry if I've missed this conversation somewhere.

The conversation took place in an in-person meeting between me, Joe, and Tim H, so no record of that, except the notes I posted above. If I recall correctly, the decision was made because we use the system of having oxygen as both equipment and consumables. The reasoning there is more clear to me as it has parts which can be understand as equipment 'Oxygen cylinder, with regulator', 'Nasal Prongs', but also filling needed which can be understand as consumables; all needed to provide oxygen to a patient. Based on this, to use it in similar way, it was decided to have Cystoscope and Endoscope as both consumable and equipment as well. But looking at this after a while I'm not sure if it is the same case and we actually should have those as both, or do they have smt used with them which should be understood as consumable? @tbhallett and @joehcollins, or was the decision made only so we can use the availability we have for these as consumables? If it's not the same as for oxygen, I feel it might be better to have them only as equipment, and those estimates based on 'expert opinion' save in a new RF with availability on essential equipment. What do you think?