BSN
29-06-2020 -By Elke Koestering on behalf of the VIM committee
Along In this way, we would like to draw attention once again to the importance of patient data using BSN (instead of name and date of birth) and verify this, and to check with your own GP. The The VIM Committee regularly receives reports in which this has not been done. Some We would like to describe this to indicate the importance of this.
- Bee triage is BSN not verified. When the patient came to HAP, ID was also not controlled. As a result, LSP could not be consulted and intolerance could be so don’t be checked. Patient required antibiotics. Patient is allergic for a particular type of antibiotics. Fortunately, the patient knew this himself and was able to prevent him from receiving the antibiotics for which he was is allergic.
- Call created in response to a telephone request for a visit from an ambulance via the BSN number. BSN does not seem to be checked by triagist, patient also not verified. The box ‘multiple births’ was ticked. Night doctor and driver were in front the door in Nieuwkoop. No one opened the door at first and everything was dark. It took so long that they almost wanted to call the police. Mr. and His wife finally opened the door in shock and said no ambulance at all and that there was nothing to worry about. Mr. turns out to be a twin brother in Zwammerdam. Doctor has transferred visit to HAP in Gouda. The call was a U2 with the result that there was a considerable delay in the visit from Gouda.
- General practitioner unverified, causing one patient’s perception to be observed by another GP.
- On the HAP was not an adequate registration of the patient, no verification of name and address details and no BSN check done. When you want to scan the HAP referral letter in the ER, the patient could not be found in HIX by name, address and date of birth. Bee checking the day overview in HIX, by date of birth, a patient with a completely different name and address/place of residence, but with a different with the same anamnesis as described in the HAP letter.
The error scanned letter has been removed and re-scanned with correct patient name.
- BITE was called by the assistant of a general practitioner. She indicated that she Patient S. had not received a notice of observation from patient S. 2 days earlier. In Topicus was no registration to be found. Later, the assistant called She had been in contact with the daughter of patient S. The daughter knew for sure that 2 days before a GP had been through the HAP. In the Topicus’ contact archive eventually found that the contact at the wrong patient S. has been entered (with the same name, gender, but different date of birth).