Forcing re-entry of patient ID cuts wrong-patient errors

You know how websites make you double enter your email address and password when you sign up for a service? Well, apparently that’s not a bad system for making sure you have the right patient during order entry. You’d think we would have figured that out a while back, but then again this is healthcare we’re talking about; equation for healthcare technology “innovation” is ([today’s technology] -10 years).

The study found that requiring clinicians to re-enter patient IDs resulted in a 41% reduction in wrong-patient orders. Single-click confirmation of patient ID reduced wrong-patient orders by 16%. It’s not all peaches and cream though. The study found that double entry increased order entry by 6.6 seconds. Oh no!

Understanding and preventing wrong-patient electronic orders: a randomized controlled trial (J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012 Jun 29 )
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate systems for estimating and preventing wrong-patient electronic orders in computerized physician order entry systems with a two-phase study. Materials and methodsIn phase 1, from May to August 2010, the effectiveness of a ‘retract-and-reorder’ measurement tool was assessed that identified orders placed on a patient, promptly retracted, and then reordered by the same provider on a different patient as a marker for wrong-patient electronic orders. This tool was then used to estimate the frequency of wrong-patient electronic orders in four hospitals in 2009. In phase 2, from December 2010 to June 2011, a three-armed randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of two distinct interventions aimed at preventing these errors by reverifying patient identification: an ‘ID-verify alert’, and an ‘ID-reentry function’.
Results: The retract-and-reorder measurement tool effectively identified 170 of 223 events as wrong-patient electronic orders, resulting in a positive predictive value of 76.2% (95% CI 70.6% to 81.9%). Using this tool it was estimated that 5246 electronic orders were placed on wrong patients in 2009. In phase 2, 901 776 ordering sessions among 4028 providers were examined. Compared with control, the ID-verify alert reduced the odds of a retract-and-reorder event (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98), but the ID-reentry function reduced the odds by a larger magnitude (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.71).
Discussion and conclusion: Wrong-patient electronic orders occur frequently with computerized provider order entry systems, and electronic interventions can reduce the risk of these errors occurring.