Current American Perception of Unique Patient Identifiers in Relation to Enhancing Health Information Exchange: Trade-Offs, Implications, and Future Possible Use Within the United States

Patient identification is becoming more crucially important, particularly as healthcare is becoming more data based and automated. Patient misidentification can cause a series of issues that affect patient safety and the quality of care, including increased time and money from the medical institution. Additionally, with the lack of standardization for identifying patients, interoperability is limited and Health Information Exchange cannot be optimized, One partial solution to the problem would be the implementation of a Unique Patient Identifier system; however, the United States has had some controversy over the implementation of such as system in the past as Congress prohibited any funding from going towards a UPI system in 1998 after HIPAA introduced a Unique Patient Identifier mandate in 1996. However, with more than 2 decades passing since the Congressional ban, the general American perception of Unique Patient Identifiers is not well known. This study attempts to answer the question of the current American perception of the implementation of a UPI system through an informational survey that induces critical thinking when answering qualitative questions with supportive quantitative questions. Participants were generally in favor of the implementation of a UPI system, and through a Chi-square analysis, it was shown that there was an association between knowledge learned about Unique Patient Identifiers in relation to the current identification system and developing a positive perception towards UPI implementation; however, this study cannot be generalized to the public as the sample size was not large enough and was not representative of the entire population. Still, future research should be conducted in relation to this subject as UPIs are a potential solution to our current “identity crisis”.