This site uses cookies.
Some of these cookies are essential to the operation of the site,
while others help to improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.
For more information, please see the ProZ.com privacy policy.
Dutch to English translations [PRO] Medical: Health Care
Dutch term or phrase:dossierhouderschap
Context: een arts kan een dossier van de patiënt beheren, hij is dus houder (holder) van het dossier. Ik heb me laten vertellen dat houderschap niet hetzelfde is als ownership. Holdership staat echter niet in Oxford en levert weinig hits op. Bestaat er een term voor in het Engels?
You're right, this was more complicated than I thought... We went with holding for "houderschap". Many thanks to ALL of you!!! 3 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
"You're right, this was more complicated than I thought... We went with <font color="blue">holding</font> for "houderschap". Many thanks to ALL of you!!!"
Are you saying that this corresponds to your answer (record keeping) rather than mine (record <font color="blue">holding</font>)??? You can have the points, but I just don't understand you. Even your very last entry here in the Discussion area (‘… about “record keeping” being a less passive activity then merely “record holding”’ …) contradicts this.
dossierhouderschap = record holding dossierhouder = record holder
This is your answer:
dossierhouderschap = record keeping/record keeper ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * After adding Barend's suggestion, I suggested this:
dossierhouderschap = record holding; fulfilling the role of a record holder dossierhouder = record holder
Compared to the rest of us, you contributed very little to the discussion, apart from your standard ‘keep it simple’ mantra. Do you honestly think that the asker selected the correct answer here?
WADR Michael, apart from the holding/keeping issue, that wasn't your answer, and saying that 'dossierhouderschap' is 'fulfilling the role of a record holder' is like saying 'ondernemerschap' is 'fulfilling the role of a entrepreneur' instead of 'doing business'. Once again, KISS.
If you went with "holding" (for "houderschap") in the end, you probably selected the wrong answer :-)
Holding was my answer, together with quite a bit of help from Barend and Kitty, and Evgeny. At the end of our very long discussion, I suggested (for the glossary):
dossierhouderschap = record holding; fulfilling the role of a record holder dossierhouder = record holder
If you're referring to the ownership issue - i.e. does referring to a person/entity as the 'record holder' of one or more medical records mean/imply that said person/entity is the owner of such records too? - this varies from country to country. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_record.
From this perspective, as well as on the basis of all the other information that's been provided in the context of this question, I don't see any reason to steer away from the term 'record holder' here. Cf. also the use of the term 'holder of personal/confidential information' in privacy law and the various obligations associated with this role (which include taking all necessary steps to safeguard such information).
... that is, as regards our running in circles. On a different note, let me therefore end my contribution to this discussion by sharing the following quote from Marten Toonder's Het monster Trotteldrom which I just happened to come across:
‘Der meerderheid weet niets,’ sprak professor Prlwytzkofski. ‘Gans niets!’ verzekerde hij. ‘Treur daarom niet, kleiner Trot. Eén persoon weet altijd meer dan een menigte.’ ‘Zou het?’ vroeg Smoris hoopvol. ‘Ik heb dat ook wel eens gedacht, maar de meerderheid was er altijd tegen.’
A "record holder" (noun: dossierhouder)... "holds records" (verb: dossier houden), and is engaged in ... "record holding" (noun: dossierhouderschap). Just different ways of saying the same thing.
The concept "dossierhouderschap" encompasses all of these things.
5.2 Taken en verantwoordelijkheden van de dossierhouder 1. De dossierhouder is de zorgaanbieder waaraan de reguliere of alternatieve verblijfszorg is toegewezen. 2. Het dossierhouderschap loopt door zolang de cliënt een opnamewens heeft en voorkeur houdt voor deze aanbieder.
2. This service provider will continue to act as the record holder as long as the client prefers them as their service provider.
Doesn't 'dossierhouderschap' refer to 'the entity acting as the record holder'?
No, it doesn't. At least not in my opinion. As I've said before, it refers to the role/status (and related duties and powers) of those responsible for holding medical records. In other words (and in Dutch), 'het dossierhouderschap wordt uitgevoerd door / is belegd bij de dossierhouder'.
See also the following link (in which 'dossierhouderschap' is probably used with a wider meaning than in asker's context, but the principle is the same):
Het dossierhouderschap wordt meestal uitgevoerd door verpleegkundige en agogische disciplines, maar kan ook worden ingevuld door gedragsdeskundigen / GZ-psychologen. Zeker bij de opstart van een team kan het zinvol zijn om het dossierhouderschap ook bij deze (behandel)disciplines te beleggen, om op deze manier het principe van gedeelde behandelverantwoordelijkheid goed in de praktijk te brengen. http://www.kennispleingehandicaptensector.nl/docs/KNP/kennis...
If you look at this perhaps 'the entity acting as the regulatory record holder'
De dossierhouder is de zorgaanbieder die de reguliere of alternatieve zorgtoewijzing voor een cliënt met een ZZP heeft ontvangen. Indien er sprake is van extramurale zorg dan is elke zorgaanbieder verantwoordelijk voor de toegewezen extramurale zorg, en is geen sprake van dossierhouderschap. (that is to say, in this case each individual HCP acts as a record holder and there is no central record holder) Uitzondering hierop vormt de overbruggingszorg.
5.2 Taken en verantwoordelijkheden van de dossierhouder 1. De dossierhouder is de zorgaanbieder waaraan de reguliere of alternatieve verblijfszorg is toegewezen. 2. Het dossierhouderschap loopt door zolang de cliënt een opnamewens heeft en voorkeur houdt voor deze aanbieder.
2. This service provider will continue to act as the record holder as long as the client prefers them as their service provider
You said: "Doesn't 'dossierhouderschap' refer to 'the entity acting as the record holder'?"
Yes, I think it does. See my answer: "refers to the person/body who/that holds the health records (see below)"
But that's only part of the story. To be more precise, "dossierhouderschap" refers to the act of holding such records (by such a person/holder), i.e., to "record holding" (which is what I added to my answer after Kitty commented on my Reference comment). Or, as Kitty put it, it refers to "the role/status (and related duties and powers) of those responsible for holding medical records")
I have a feeling we are going around in circles, or at least, partial circles ;)
I did not read everything you already posted (I was not around on Thursday). You posted this legislation ref earlier I found out.
Dossierhouders (COPD)
In het kwaliteitssysteem ligt vast op welke wijze (hoe, waar, wanneer en door wie) gegevens met betrekking tot de zorgverlening en behandeling van de patiënt worden vastgelegd en overgedragen. Voor actualiteit van (de verschillende delen van) het dossier van de patiënt worden een of meer zorgverleners aangewezen die als dossierhouder optreden en die onderling afspraken maken over uitwisseling van informatie waarbij ook informatieuitwisseling over het stoppen en wijzigen van (onderdelen van de) behandeling worden meegenomen.
Dossierhouders en centrale dossierhouder (optie voor de toekomst)
De positie van de huisarts wordt verstevigd doordat de huisarts gemandateerd beheerder/ dossierhouder wordt van ‘alle’ gegevens van de patiënt. Een dergelijke centrale dossierhouder wordt noodzakelijk op het moment dat ‘alle’ medische informatie van alle zorgverleners beschikbaar komt (missie NICTIZ). De informatiechaos die velen in dat geval verwachten, kan worden voorkomen door bijtijds te zorgen voor één samenvattend dossier.
Explanation: To sum up what I discovered (see the www.nhs.uk + www.legislation.gov.uk + Royal United Hospitals of Bath refs below), here in the UK, a patient's NHS health records are (1) the property of (i.e. owned by) the Secretary of State for Health, but various people/bodies (e.g. GPs) may (2) ‘hold’ them in the course of their work, and in/when doing so, become the "(health) record holder".
‘For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended.’
record holder = the abstract/legal entity/role [‘dossierhouderschap’] records manager = actual person/body doing it [‘de/een dossierhouder’]
Speaking about relevant (‘inhoudelijke’) info, that's yet another great ref, the NHS one. I suspect that if you had time to go through tons of NHS stuff, you'd find more and more information bearing out my interpretation.
After a person has died, their GP health records will be passed to Primary Care Support England, so they can be stored. To access their GP records, apply to the records manager in the relevant local area. The deceased person's GP can tell you who to contact, or you can access a list of local services.
GP records are generally retained for 10 years after the patient's death before they are destroyed.
For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Applying for access to your health records
Depending on which health records you want to see, submit your request in writing or by email to a registered health professional such as: •your GP surgery •your optician •your dentist •the hospital trust's health records manager or patient services manager
I agree with Evgeny that this showing off with numbers is a pretty empty, unsatisfactory and often misleading approach.
I would prefer an 'inhoudelijke' approach.
In this respect, this uk government link may be helpful (in the uk context).
It would also be helpful if we had the exact context, that is to say how does this 'dossierhouderschap' occur in the asker's text.
The sentence at issue and preceding sentences + possible relevant background info.
Evgeny Artemov (X)
South Africa
OK,OK
21:00 Jan 23, 2016
Mike, I meant that merely as a general warning against being overimpressed by the number of zeros in the thousands and millions of ghits, especially when comparing, with the bottom page producing quite the contrary results. Only that.
Not sure about the exact numbers, but it remains clear (even after clicking into many of the individual pages, as you suggested) that ‘holder’ and ‘health record’ are used more often in a UK context, and particularly heavily in the NHS and by the UK gov. If it's all over NHS and UK gov. sites, it's good enough for me.
About 81,800 results. OK. Go to the bottom. The last page is Page 9 (i.e. promises not more than 1,000 ghits, right?) Click on it. It opens into Page Page 5 of about 382 results.
DO NOT BELIEVE GOOGLE, man, it’s a half-Russian job. :-)
Evgeny Artemov (X)
South Africa
Lemmy spoil the sport, Mike.
20:36 Jan 23, 2016
Set your Google to 100 results per page and go to https://www.google.co.uk/search?q="record holder" medical re... (About 47,700 results) then scroll down to the bottom and go to the last result page (Page 8 as is stated). Open it, and it happens to be only the fifth and reads at the top: Page 5 of about 457 results (0.77 seconds) (0.76 seconds)
Another option might be that the manager and the keeper are two separate entities, with one keeper (central provider) having final responsibilities and powers.
My problem with 'holder' is that it may sound to 'exclusive'.
It seems currently this medical record is 'owned' by no one and by everyone. It exists there somewhere in the system and it can be accessed, used or changed by a great many parties.
Probably only the providers and the patient can change it. Probably there is a central provider with final responsibilities and powers.
You might call this person the 'medical record manager'.
Traditional medical records management activities - such as forms control, record content analysis and control, record tracking, release of information monitoring, record storage and record destruction - are now performed within large and diverse healthcare enterprises, requiring that decision making and problem solving address the system as a whole. The range of personnel, facilities and equipment that frequently are connected and supported by an information management system also dictates a more global approach to the subject of medical records and law. Traditional legal issues affecting the collection, maintenance and access to medical records information have evolved with today's health care systems and this information increasingly is being collected and stored electronically. These two trends, increased computer automation and dispersed access to information, have had, and will continue to have a profound effect on the legal issues surrounding health information management.
If we then change "medical records" to "health records" (I think that Barend's quote shows why there seems to have been a movement away from the former towards the latter), we get the following:
About 107,000 results (0.28 seconds) [five times as many hits] Exclusively UK hits, many of which NHS and BMA stuff. Basically all UK hospital websites, or NHS.
Although the medical record originally developed as a business record of individual healthcare providers (primarily hospitals and physicians), it is now a document that supplies health information critical to continuity of care, is subjected to substantial state and federal regulation, and is "owned" as much, if not more, by the patient as by the provider.
Today, because managed care is the dominant form of health insurance coverage in the United States, the hospital's prominance as the keeper of the medical record is reduced. A patient may consult many healthcare providers - including primary care physicians, specialists, hospitals, laboratories, surgical centers and rehabilitation centers - and each of them will participate in creating a record for that particular patient.
Particularly if used as a title, I think I would opt for something like:
- What does it mean to be a record holder? - The role of the record holder - Duties and powers of the record holder [if these are specified in the actual text]
Or more fully and to disambiguate: record holder > holder of the medical record
Evgeny Artemov (X)
South Africa
18:28 Jan 22, 2016
@KelseyR, exactly what does your context say? Keeping, holding, maintaining or possessing the record in question? Do not paraphrase the context, just copy and paste it here. I strongly suspect that your "houderschap" meant the exercise of control over it, i.e. possession, as is often in forensic contexts discussing privacy and access.
My answer contains more than enough to explain what the Dutch term ‘dossierhouderschap’ means, and how to translate it into English.
I started with ‘refers to the person/body who/that holds the health records (see below)’, and then, after Kitty’s comment, added: ‘record holding’, as my second attempt to translate the term. Your answer is ‘record keeping’. Mine is ‘record holding’.
Yes, I read your refs. However, I feel that the word ‘keep(ing)’ focuses too much on the maintenance aspect, whereas ‘hold’ is merely that: the health records are (1) owned + (2) held.
Health records Wherever you visit an NHS service a record is created for you. This means medical information about you can be held in various places, including your GP practice, any hospital where you’ve had treatment, your dentist practice, and so on.
Since April 2015 all GPs should offer their patients online access to summary information of their GP records. To find out more about how to access medical records online or in paper see the section How to access your health records.
A health record (sometime referred to as medical record) should contain all the clinical information about the care you received. This is important so every health professional involved at different stages of your care has access to your medical history such as allergies, operations or tests. Based on this information, the health professional can make judgements about your care going forward. Find out more about different types of records.
Your health records should include everything to do with your care including x-rays or discharge notes. The data in your records can include: […]"
The British Medical Journal is good enough for me Michael. Did you actually read any of my references, or are you determined to unnecessarily complicate this?
Btw, if you think 'record holder' is OK - even though it has been pointed out to you that the question was 'houderschap' and not 'houder' - why did you put up 'refers to the person/body who/that holds the health records'?? And I believe the preferred term is 'medical record' anyway?
How many NHS and UK government refs do I need to provide to convince you that ‘record holder’ (or the ‘holder of the record’) is perfectly OK, in fact correct in UK English, in a medical/government context? Pls have a look at the various refs in my answer. There is really no danger of people thinking they are about sports.
'holder' - somebody who has something in their possession, not the owner. 'keeper' - somebody who has something in their possession and looks after it, the obvious examples being zookeeper or beekeeper.
'Record holder' should in any case be avoided because of its association with sports records etc. The only other option I can see is 'stewardship', but it sounds a bit transatlantic for my taste.
'Editing medical records is evidence that they are inaccurate and makes them impossible to defend. The General Medical Council clearly states that records should be made at the time the events happen, or as soon as possible afterwards.'
I discussed it with a British friend, he'd go for "holding" but he wasn't entirely sure. To hold a file here means you are able to manage it, you don't technically own it though so it's hard to talk about ownership but it's more than just keeping a record, they can modify it and the like.
I now see that 'dossierhouder' en 'dossierhouderschap' often have a much wider and less literal meaning (i.e. not or less literally referring to record holding/keeping) than all of us seem to have assumed so far. See f.i. the second link in my reference comment.
I therefore agree with Michael that it would be helpful to know the exact context in which 'dossierhouderschap' is used here.
To sum up what I discovered, here in the UK, a patient's NHS health records are the property of (i.e. owned by) the Secretary of State for Health, but various people/bodies (e.g. GPs) may ‘hold’ them in the course of their work, and in/when doing so, become the "(health) records holder".
"Can I access the medical records (health records) of someone who has died?
If you want to see the health records of someone who has died, you can apply in writing to the record holder under the Access to Health Records Act (1990). Under the terms of the Act, you will only be able to access the deceased’s health records if you are either:
[…]
GP records are generally retained for 10 years after the patient's death before they are destroyed. For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended. Fees may apply for accessing these records." (http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/access-to-medical-or-health-reco... )
(1) In this Act “health record” means a record which—
(a) consists of information relating to the physical or mental health of an individual who can be identified from that information, or from that and other information in the possession of the holder of the record; and (b) has been made by or on behalf of a health professional in connection with the care of that individual;F1. . ..
(2) In this Act “holder”, in relation to a health record, means— […] Right of access to health records.
(1) An application for access to a health record, or to any part of a health record, may be made to the holder of the record by any of the following, namely— […] (2) Subject to section 4 below, where an application is made under subsection (1) above the holder shall, within the requisite period, give access to the record, or the part of a record, to which the application relates—"
"Although these pilots used retrospective collection of data, they did demonstrate that transfer of eSource data to a sponsor for clinical trial analysis is feasible and also that efficiencies can be seen using this process. Since the collection was an export from the EHR, the medical records holder could control that only depersonalized data were exported and protect patients’ privacy." (https://www.w3.org/wiki/images/2/21/HCLS$$ClinicalObservationsInteroperability$FutureEHR.pdf )
Indeed, here in the UK, a patient's (NHS) medical records are the property of the Secretary of State for Health, but various people/bodies (e.g. GPs) may X them in the course of their work. Just not sure what that X is called here.
Barend will probably know, and if not, figure it out for you ;)
if ‘dossierhouderschap’ derives from ‘bijhouden’, rather than merely ‘houden’:
see e.g.:
NL: Legt medische dossiers aan en houdt deze bij. EN: Create and maintain medical reports and records
NL: Stelt dossiers op over de conditie en ontwikkeling van cliënten en de geleverde zorg/diensten en houdt deze dossiers bij. EN: Create and maintain records of the patient`s progress/development and services performed
refers to the person/body who/that holds the health records (see below)
Explanation: To sum up what I discovered (see the www.nhs.uk + www.legislation.gov.uk + Royal United Hospitals of Bath refs below), here in the UK, a patient's NHS health records are (1) the property of (i.e. owned by) the Secretary of State for Health, but various people/bodies (e.g. GPs) may (2) ‘hold’ them in the course of their work, and in/when doing so, become the "(health) record holder".
"Health record holdership" obviously sounds silly (as an attempt to force the Dutch term "dossierhouderschap" into English), but I think my various explanations get the message across.
(1) In this Act “health record” means a record which—
(a) consists of information relating to the physical or mental health of an individual who can be identified from that information, or from that and other information in the possession of the holder of the record; and (b) has been made by or on behalf of a health professional in connection with the care of that individual;F1. . ..
(2) In this Act “holder”, in relation to a health record, means— […] Right of access to health records.
(1) An application for access to a health record, or to any part of a health record, may be made to the holder of the record by any of the following, namely— […] (2) Subject to section 4 below, where an application is made under subsection (1) above the holder shall, within the requisite period, give access to the record, or the part of a record, to which the application relates— […]" (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/23 ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * nhs.uk
"Can I access the medical records (health records) of someone who has died?
If you want to see the health records of someone who has died, you can apply in writing to the record holder under the Access to Health Records Act (1990). Under the terms of the Act, you will only be able to access the deceased’s health records if you are either:
[…]
GP records are generally retained for 10 years after the patient's death before they are destroyed. For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended. Fees may apply for accessing these records." (http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/access-to-medical-or-health-reco... ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * Royal United Hospitals of Bath - NHS
"When can the record holder refuse to provide information?
The record holder has the right to make sure of your identity when you request information from your health records. If you are applying on someone else's behalf the record holder has the right to check that you have permission to do so. The record holder may refuse to disclose information from the health records:
[…]
You may not want copies of all your records. The record holder will ask you to say which parts you want so as to save time and expense." (http://www.ruh.nhs.uk/patients/advice_and_support/pals/acces... ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * nhs.uk
"If you want to view medical records held by other NHS services or wish to view someone else’s records or the records of a deceased person then you need to make a formal request under the Data Protection Act (1998) and apply in writing to the holder(s) of the records." (http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/records/healthrecords/Pa... )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ *
-------------------------------------------------- Note added at 8 hrs (2016-01-21 23:36:21 GMT) --------------------------------------------------
SOME REFS FOR "RECORD HOLDING" (which I would like to add to my answer):
"Except in the case of non-NHS or non-NHS predecessor records which are not owned by the record-holding authority, but held on loan.These are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act." (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web... )
"Panel Cites Lack of Security on Medical Records
The panel said health organizations should impose controls to limit access to electronic records, like passwords for authorized users or electronic blocks called ''firewalls'' that deny entry to unwanted outsiders. In addition, it said, each record-holding group should have internal policies that track who obtains access to records, limit it on a need-to-know basis and discourage behavior like leaving a record displayed on a computer screen after the user is done with it." (http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/06/us/panel-cites-lack-of-sec... )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * Slightly different, but still relevant:
"The centralisation of medical records undertaken by Aintree University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust has produced enhanced operational efficiency and increased record-holding capacity." (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web... )
"Recent news reports have detailed how hacking has become a major concern for medical data misuse, with the increasing digitization of medical records, combined with the still more recent shift toward cloud-based record holding and the growing role of technology in health care exacerbating the issue. IDC Health Insights recently reported that 70% of health care organizations worldwide will invest in mobile health tech such as apps, wearables, remote monitoring, and virtual care by 2018." (http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150211006277/en/ERI-... )
Example sentence(s):
For hospital records, the record holder is the records manager at the hospital the person attended.
If you want to view medical records held by other NHS services or view someone else’s records or the records of a deceased person then you need to make a formal request under the Data Protection Act and apply in writing to the holder(s) of the records.
Michael Beijer United Kingdom Local time: 01:52 Native speaker of: English PRO pts in category: 16