December 27, 2019
The House of Representatives recently voted to lift a ban prohibiting funding for a national patient identifier system (NPI) designed to improve patient matching1.
However, the Senate chose not to finalize the House’s lifting of the ban due to privacy concerns, as the 2020 fiscal budget bill retained the prohibition2.
So, what does that mean moving forward? What could an eventual lifting of the ban look like?
Let’s dive into the implications.
If the ban on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service providing funding for a national patient identifier were to be lifted, it would be critical to become familiar with exactly what an NPI system is.
Essentially, an NPI system would assign each U.S. citizen a unique number to identify them across the healthcare system, a move that had been previously tabled for more than two decades due to privacy concerns.
In theory, such a system would help prevent duplicate patient records, make the transfer of patient information simpler and ease other unnecessary costs associated with patient identification.
While the overall goal of an NPI system would be aimed at streamlining patient identification and aiding the healthcare industry, in general, there are concerns, as well.
Here are some potential positive impacts of an NPI system:
With funding freed up, HHS would also be free to focus on developing national standards aimed at preventing doctor shopping for prescription drugs.
With patients utilizing one, universal ID, the chances of patient duplication, provision of incorrect medication, and other missteps associated with inaccurate patient information could decrease, lowering costs along with them.
While security and privacy are still concerns surrounding an NPI system, some argue that having a national ID that is used in place of other key pieces of information (Social Security number, birthdate, name, address, etc.) could make patients more secure.
An NPI system could aid the healthcare industry in creating modern and scalable solutions as society continues to evolve and change.
While an NPI system could lead to the aforementioned benefits, there are still concerns with such a national database. These include:
While an NPI ID could be more secure in theory, that number falling into the wrong hands would bring along with it access to the entirety of a patient’s medical records, which may not be the case with current forms of identification.
Though an NPI system could lower costs, overall, that doesn’t eliminate the significant cost of creating an implementing such a system in the first place, which could prove insurmountable.
Though a single, universal number could aid in streamlining patient information processes, incorrect entering of those numbers, accidental duplicates, etc. could raise the same problems that currently exist.
With the House voting to lift the ban on funding for an NPI system, national patient identification could continue gaining steam moving forward despite the Senate’s continue unwillingness to pull the final trigger.
It’s one of the most important processes in the healthcare industry, so keeping a keen eye on new developments and having a thorough understanding of what exactly an NPI system could mean for the country’s healthcare will be critical moving forward.