Advertisement

System and Data Protection

  • Gretchen Murphy
Part of the Computers in Health Care book series (HI)

Abstract

System reliability and security data integrity and confidentiality are universally recognized patient computer-based record (CPR) system attributes (Bleich et al. 1987). Originating in the ethical relationship between patient and physician and in the legal and professional policies and standards applicable to medical practitioners, these essential elements of a sound—that is, a properly (and only properly) structured, maintained, and used—CPR SYSTEM have evolved in other settings throughout history and most recently in the computer context. Requirements that these essential elements be present have been extended throughoutU.S. health care, regardless of setting, by current federal and state legislation, as well as by institutional and professional association policy. The scope of these related terms encompasses programs within hospitals and other health care organizations that use paper medical record systems (Lavere 1982; Privacy Protection Study Commission 1977; Waters and Murphy 1982). Organizations using CPR systems face these same problems, but at a higher level of complexity. Basic methods used to maintain patient information reliability, security, and integrity, and safeguard confidentiality are therefore folded into formal goals and objectives for organizations, regardless of the system they use.

Health records are used to provide a medium of communication for current and future patient care.... the patient must be assured that the information shared with health care professionals will remain confidential. Without such assurance, the patient may withhold critical information which could affect the quality of care provided, the relationship with the provider, and the reliability of the information maintained (American Medical Association 1985).

Keywords

Data Protection System Reliability Data Security Hospital Information System National Bureauof Standard 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Medical Record Association. 1985. Confidentiality of patient health information. Position statement of the American Medical Record Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Benjamin, C.D., and B. Baum. 1988. The automated medical record: A practical realization? Topics in Health Record Management 9(1):5–6.Google Scholar
  3. Bissen, C.A. 1988. Data security: Protecting a corporate asset. Topics in Health Records Management 9(1):14.Google Scholar
  4. Bleich, H.L. 1987. Clinical computing in a teaching hospital: Use and impact of computers in clinical medicine, ed. J.G. Anderson and S.J. Jay. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Blum, B.I. 1986. Clinical Information Systems. New York: Springer-Verlag, chaps. 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gabrieli, E.R. 1989. Electronic ambulatory medical record. Journal of Clinical Computing 18(2):27–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gardner, E. 1989. Computer dilemma: Clinical access vs confidentiality. Modern Healthcare 19(44):32–34,38,40–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Griesser, G. 1989. Data protection in hospital information systems: I. Definition and overview. Implementing healthcare information systems. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  9. Lavere, GJ. 1982. The ethical aspects of medical privacy, computers and medical privacy. Workshop Manual, Computers and Medical Privacy Conference, San Diego.Google Scholar
  10. Martin, J. 1983. Managing the database environment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Prentice Hall, 587.Google Scholar
  11. Personal privacy in an information society. July 1977. The Report of the Privacy Protection Study Commission, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  12. Schechter, K.S. 1988. Conversion issues and data integrity: A consultant’s perspective. Topics in Health Record Management, December.Google Scholar
  13. Schraffenberger, L.A. 1988. Practice bulletin, data security. JAMRA 59(8):46–47.Google Scholar
  14. Schwartz, W.B. 1987. Medicine and the computer: The promise and problems of change. Use and impact of conflicts in clinical medicine. New York: SpringerVerlag, 332.Google Scholar
  15. Waller, A.A., S.N. Chernoff, and D.K. Fulton. 1989. Automated medical records: Legal questions and risks. Computers in Healthcare, November.Google Scholar
  16. Waters, K., and G. Murphy. 1979. Medical records in health information. Silver Spring, Md.: Aspen, 260.Google Scholar
  17. Waters, K., and G. Murphy. 1983. Systems analysis and computer applications in health information management. Silver Spring, Md.: Aspen.Google Scholar
  18. Waters, K., and G. Murphy. 1982. Systems analysis and computer applications in health information management. Silver Spring, Md.: Aspen Systems.Google Scholar
  19. Westin, A. 1976. Computer, health records and citizen rights. National Bureau of Standards Monograph 157. Gaithersburg, Md.: National Bureau of Standards, 348.Google Scholar
  20. Westin, A.F. 1982, Patients’ rights: Computers and health records. In Managing computers in health care, ed. J.A. Worthley. Arlington, Va.: AUPHA Press, 201.Google Scholar

Statutes

  1. Federal Statute, Drug and Alcohol Treatment & Rehabilitation Act 42C.F.R., Part 2.Google Scholar
  2. Washington State Statute, Sexually transmitted disease information, R.C., 10. 70.24.110.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gretchen Murphy

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations