Patient Identification Techniques – Approaches, Implications, and Findings

Abstract

Objectives: To identify current patient identification techniques and approaches used worldwide in today’s healthcare environment. To identify challenges associated with improper patient identification. Methods: A literature review of relevant peer-reviewed and grey literature published from January 2015 to October 2019 was conducted to inform the paper. The focus was on: 1) patient identification techniques and 2) unintended consequences and ramifications of unresolved patient identification issues. Results: The literature review showed six common patient identification techniques implemented worldwide ranging from unique patient identifiers, algorithmic approaches, referential matching software, biometrics, radio frequency identification device (RFID) systems, and hybrid models. The review revealed three themes associated with unresolved patient identification: 1) treatment, care delivery, and patient safety errors, 2) cost and resource considerations, and 3) data sharing and interoperability challenges. Conclusions: Errors in patient identification have implications for patient care and safety, payment, as well as data sharing and interoperability. Different patient identification techniques ranging from unique patient identifiers and algorithms to hybrid models have been implemented worldwide. However, no current patient identification techniques have resulted in a 100% match rate. Optimizing algorithmic matching through data standardization and referential matching software should be studied further to identify opportunities to enhance patient identification techniques and approaches. Further efforts to improve patient identity management include adoption of patients’ photos at registration, naming conventions, and standardized processes for recording patients’ demographic data attributes.

Development and Validation of a Checklist for the Safety of Hospitalized Children

“…The category referring to safety in identifying pediatric patients was validated with a CVI-C of 0.97. A number of studies have shown that non-adoption of this practice and limitations in the process and technology result in inaccurate identification of patients, which may affect clinical decision-making and treatment, negatively interfering with the quality and safety of the care provided [9][10] .…”

Biometric linkage of longitudinally collected electronic case report forms and confirmation of subject identity: An open framework for ODK and related tools

“…Scant literature addresses topics of participant (mis)identification in research and trials, but in clinical care the subject is better explored (23,24) and highlights that patient mis-identification is common even in high income countries (HICs) with well-developed health information systems. In resource-restricted settings, challenges are magnified, particularly when complex longitudinal data collection centres around the use of experimental medical products, or the surveillance of infectious diseases in remote locales (16).…”

Analyzing an Implementation of Patient Safety Targets Standards at Ja'far Medika Hospital Based on Hospital Accreditation National Standards (SNARS) Issue 1.1

“…around the world. 9 The use of wristbands as a means to support the patient identification process is in accordance with applicable regulations. 10 In observing the implementation of patient safety goals, it was found that medical officers performed infusions and urinary catheters without identifying the patient.…”