Enabling Technology to Advance Health-Protecting Individual Rights-Are We Walking the Talk?
The evolving structure and business of health care services and delivery need the functionality and capability offered by electronic health record (EHR) systems. By electronically diffusing the traditional patient record, however, this new model blurs the long-established medical data home, raising concerns about data ownership, confidentiality, access and individual rights. In 2008 the Lawson Health Research Institute began the process of instituting a robust health informatics and collaborative research infrastructure, now known as I-THINK Research. As data are migrated to the platform and policies are developed, we are forced to confront the complexity of issues around protection of individual rights. The paper presents, in a broader context, the main issues surrounding the privacy debate and the need for education, accountability and new legislation to help define and protect individual rights as new e-health business models emerge.
KeywordseHealth electronic health records consent Google Health Microsoft Vault personal health records privacy confidentiality
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Economist, Medine goes digital: A special report on healthcare and technology. Economist, 1–16 (2009)Google Scholar
- 6.Lang, R.D.: Blurring the lines: who owns the medical data home? J. Healthc. Inf. Manag. 22, 2–4 (2008)Google Scholar
- 8.Sharp, C.: Conference Report: ICT 2008 - I’s to the Future: Invention, Innovation, Impact. Online 33[March/April 2], pp. 22–25. Information Today, Inc. (2009)Google Scholar
- 11.Rosenbaum, S., Painter, M.: Assessing Legal Implications of Using Health Data to Improve Health Care Quality and Eliminate Health Care Disparities. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2005)Google Scholar
- 13.Conn, J.: Data encryption just one option under security law. Modern Healthcare (2009)Google Scholar
- 15.El Emam, K., Kosseim, P.: Privacy Interests in Prescription Data, Part 2. IEEE Security & Privacy, 75–78 (2009)Google Scholar
- 16.Kosseim, P., El Emam, K.: Privacy Interests in Prescription Data, Part 1. IEEE Security & Privacy 72 (2009)Google Scholar
- 18.Nixon, P., Wagealla, W., English, C., Terzis, S.: Security, privacy and trust issues in smart environments, Glasgow, Scotland, The Global and Pervasive Computing Group, Department of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Stathclyde (2009); 5-18-0090Google Scholar
- 19.Committee on Health Research and the Privacy of Health Information. Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research: Report Brief, Washington DC, Institute of Medicine (2009) Google Scholar
- 20.Lysyk, M., El Emam, K., Lucock, C., Power, M., Willison, D.: Privacy Guidelines Workshop Report, Ottawa, Canada (2006) 7-6-0090Google Scholar
- 21.Sharp, C.: Electronic Health Information: A boon and a curse! The Free Pint, Newsletter (2001); 7-6-0090Google Scholar
- 24.Economist. Medicine’s new central bankers. Economist (December 8, 2005)Google Scholar
- 27.Schaffer, A.: Your Medical Data Online: Google and Microsoft are offering rival programs that let people manage their own health information. Technology Review (July/August 2008)Google Scholar
- 28.Singer, E.: Personal Medical Monitoring: Keeping tabs on your vitals with Microsoft HealthVault. Technology Review (April 24, 2009)Google Scholar
- 29.Harris, L.: Google Health Heads to the Hospital: A new partnership at a Boston hospital could forecast future success. Technology Review (May 28, 2008)Google Scholar
- 31.Groves, T.: Managing UK research data for future use. BMJ 338 (2009)Google Scholar
- 32.Halamka, J.: Blog Entry: A Privacy Framework for Personal Health Records, December 17. Blog (2008)Google Scholar
- 33.Chhanabhai, P., Holt, A.: Consumers are ready to accept the transition to online and electronic records if they can be assured of the security measures. Med. Gen. Med. 9, 8 (2007)Google Scholar
- 34.Robinson, N., Graux, H., Botterman, M., Valeri, L.: Review of the European Data Protection Directive. TR7 10-ICO, Cambridge, UK, Rand Europe (2009)Google Scholar
- 36.Connecting For Health. Common Framework for Networked Personal Health Information. Connecting for Health Website (2009); The Markle Foundation, 7-6-0090Google Scholar