Representing Patient Address
Patient Preference/Consent

Comment

Submitted by atomlinson on

Naming Policy Framework 2023: Enhancing Person Matching with Ess

AHIMA supports the inclusion of the Naming Policy Framework 2023: Enhancing Person Matching with Essential Demographic Data Elements into the ISA to support the accurate capture and representation of a patient's name. This 2023 Policy Framework includes details on the following:

  • Standardizing Naming Policies: addresses the lack of standardization in naming policies across the healthcare ecosystem. This standardization is crucial for efficient and accurate identification and matching of person(s) to their health records, as well as for large data set migrations.
  • Recognizing Evolving Ecosystem: The framework acknowledges the changing landscape of health information management, where essential person(s) demographic data goes beyond traditional master/enterprise patient indexes. With entities collecting and sharing Electronic Health Information, additional data elements become necessary for effective identification, matching, and management of health records.
  • Guiding Best Practices: AHIMA calls for the adoption and use of this demographic data element framework, representing current operational best practices. It is designed to evolve over time with technological advancements and operational procedures, ensuring it remains relevant and effective in the ever-changing healthcare environment.

naming-policy_final.pdf

Submitted by jjstaas on

Patient Naming Policy

We will not reach complete and accurate interoperability until all of the industry follows the same naming standards. I support AHIMA's Patient Naming Policy to improve interoperability and patient safety.

Submitted by mxenakis@virtua.org on

Patient Naming Policy

I support AHIMA’s Patient Naming Policy to improve patient safety. 

Submitted by mpruente on

Patient Naming Policy

Accurately determining patient identity is critical for patient safety and hospital operations. I support AHIMA's Naming Policy for accurate capture of patient names to reduce duplicates and overlays and support interoperability. 

Submitted by kcanama on

Patient Naming Policy

I support AHIMA’s Patient Naming Policy to improve patient safety and also to decrease the financial burden of duplicate tests that are ordered when patient records cannot be assimilated.

Submitted by kklischi on

Patient Safety

I support AHIMA;s Naming Policy to improve patient safety.

Submitted by bonitagigi on

Patient Naming Policy

I support AHIMA’s Patient Naming Policy to improve patient safety.

Submitted by tbui on

Patient Naming Policy

I support AHIMA’s Patient Naming Policy to decrease the financial burden of duplicate tests that are ordered when patient records cannot be assimilated.

Submitted by ecrane on

Patient Name Requiremts

I support AHIMA's Patient Naming Policy to improve patient safety in healthcare by utilizing the legal name as standard practice.

Submitted by jkegerize on

ACLA ISA comment re: Patient Names

Proposed guidance should not conflict with and must not supersede ANSI accredited standards already cited for federal adoption, for example by CMS or ONC that may be included in HL7 V2 standards such as the Meaningful Use Stage 1 citation of HL7® Version 2.5.1: Implementation Guide: Electronic Laboratory Reporting to Public Health (US Realm), Release 1 with Errata and Clarifications and ELR 2.5.1 Clarification Document for EHR Technology Certification.

 

Perhaps the ISA scope statement could contain a statement that the ISA does not intend to cite conflicting standards and any conflicts should be reported directly to ONC?

            The ISA is not exhaustive, but it is expected to be incrementally updated to include a broader range of health IT interoperability needs. When more than one standard or implementation specification is listed it is intended to prompt industry dialogue as to whether one standard or implementation specification is necessary or if the industry can efficiently interoperate more than one. It may also reflect the fact that there is an ongoing transition from the use of one standard towards a new version or even a next-generation approach.