Master Patient Index Part 1
Useand Importance of the Master Patient Index
MPIis an automated health care database which keeps data on each patientrecorded at a healthcare association. It is used throughout ahealthcare organization to maintain reliable, correct, up-to-datedemographic and crucial clinical information on the patients seen andmanaged within its specific departments it holds info such as clientname, date of birth, sexual category, race, ethnic background andresidential and contact addresses. It may also include information ondoctors and other health professionals and facility staff within ahealth care organization (Dooling & Downing, 2014).
TheMPI confirms that each patient is characterized just once, and withcontinuous statistical characteristic documentation within everystructure of hospital data. By storing this well-ordered information,health care organizations can offer more effective and accurate careof their clients. Likewise, the Master Patient Index can also supportintegration of patient data found in distinct systems within onefacility as it stores information in a similar design. It functionsas the main foundation of health care info transfer between clinicalamenities (Crapo, Jared., Coyle, David, Owen &Pearson, 2015).
Which Medical Record Number Would One Keep for Each Case
Sincethe policy of the hospital is to retain the oldest medical recordnumber which is the lowest number, the medical record number to bekept in each case is as follows. In case 1, record number 016792 iskept. In case 2, medical record number 042121 is kept. In case 3,medical record number 114682 is kept. In case 4, medical recordnumber 015467 is kept. In case 5, medical record number 122199 iskept and finally case 6, medical record number 098972 is kept.
Is there any Need for Further Documentation Review to Determine if the Patients Match?
Becausein an actual clinical setting, one might have sheets of potentialmatches and the higher the probability the more likely the match sosome patients can be selected for further investigation if theirprobabilities are lower. For this reason, cases 6, 4 and 2 may needfurther documentation to determine if they are the same since theirprobability is low thus they are less likely to match.
Based on Question 2, What Documentation Elements (Data Elements) could One Review to Determine Whether They Were same or not?
Sincepotential matches have a higher probability, for instance, from thereport shown in table 1-1(MPI), the patients in case 1 have a higherprobability hence their documentation or data elements are the samein this case, both patients’ SSN numbers and date of birth are thesame depicting that data elements such as account numbers, addresses,names and residential area addresses may show the similarity ordifferences between patients in a master patient index.
WhatHappens if new Files Lapse in their Regular Review of Data Quality onPatient Charts
Whenthis lapse continues for a year or more, the new files added to thedata won’t sync to other computers or be available until theaccount is under the storage limits it may lead to continuous lossof completed operations coverage thus loss of goodwill. Equally, thelapse will acquire paid up values and a surrender value may beavailable if this plan has been in force for three years (Payne,2016).
Crapo,Jared., Coyle, David M., Owen C., Pearson & McRae K. (2015)."Managing patient consent in a master patient index.".Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Payne,Thomas H., Beahan, S., Fellner, J., Martin, D., & Elmore, J(2016). Health Records All Access Pass. Journal of AHIMA, 87(8),36-39.
DoolingJ. A., & Downing, K. (2014). Ensuringdata integrity through a clean master patient index.Journal of AHIMA/American Health Information Management Association,85(3), 46.
No related posts.