Article

Health information technology and the idea of informed consent.

Department of Health Policy at the School of Public Health and Health Services, George Washington University Medical Center in Washington, DC, USA.
The Journal of Law Medicine &amp Ethics (Impact Factor: 0.94). 03/2010; 38(1):27-35. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00463.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT During this early stage of HIT adoption, it is critical that we engage in discussions regarding informed consent's proper role in a health care environment in which electronic information sharing holds primary importance. This article discusses current implementation of the doctrine within health information exchange networks; the relationship between informed consent and privacy; the variety of ways that the concept is referenced in discussions of information sharing; and challenges that surround incorporation of the doctrine into the evolving HIT environment. The article concludes by reviewing the purpose behind the traditional obligation to obtain informed consent and the possibility of maintaining its relevance in the new environment.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
76 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Technological advances in clinical informatics have made large amounts of data accessible and potentially useful for research. As a result, a burgeoning literature addresses efforts to bridge the fields of health services research and biomedical informatics. The Electronic Data Methods Forum review examines peer-reviewed literature at the intersection of comparative effectiveness research and clinical informatics. The authors are specifically interested in characterizing this literature and identifying cross-cutting themes and gaps in the literature. A 3-step systematic literature search was conducted, including a structured search of PubMed, manual reviews of articles from selected publication lists, and manual reviews of research activities based on prospective electronic clinical data. Two thousand four hundred thirty-five citations were identified as potentially relevant. Ultimately, a full-text review was performed for 147 peer-reviewed papers. One hundred thirty-two articles were selected for inclusion in the review. Of these, 88 articles are the focus of the discussion in this paper. Three types of articles were identified, including papers that: (1) provide historical context or frameworks for using clinical informatics for research, (2) describe platforms and projects, and (3) discuss issues, challenges, and applications of natural language processing. In addition, 2 cross-cutting themes emerged: the challenges of conducting research in the absence of standardized ontologies and data collection; and unique data governance concerns related to the transfer, storage, deidentification, and access to electronic clinical data. Finally, the authors identified several current gaps on important topics such as the use of clinical informatics for cohort identification, cloud computing, and single point access to research data.
    Medical care 07/2012; 50 Suppl:S38-48. · 2.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Current image sharing is carried out by manual transportation of CDs by patients or organization-coordinated sharing networks. The former places a significant burden on patients and providers. The latter faces challenges to patient privacy. OBJECTIVE: To allow healthcare providers efficient access to medical imaging data acquired at other unaffiliated healthcare facilities while ensuring strong protection of patient privacy and minimizing burden on patients, providers, and the information technology infrastructure. METHODS: An image sharing framework is described that involves patients as an integral part of, and with full control of, the image sharing process. Central to this framework is the Patient Controlled Access-key REgistry (PCARE) which manages the access keys issued by image source facilities. When digitally signed by patients, the access keys are used by any requesting facility to retrieve the associated imaging data from the source facility. A centralized patient portal, called a PCARE patient control portal, allows patients to manage all the access keys in PCARE. RESULTS: A prototype of the PCARE framework has been developed by extending open-source technology. The results for feasibility, performance, and user assessments are encouraging and demonstrate the benefits of patient-controlled image sharing. DISCUSSION: The PCARE framework is effective in many important clinical cases of image sharing and can be used to integrate organization-coordinated sharing networks. The same framework can also be used to realize a longitudinal virtual electronic health record. CONCLUSION: The PCARE framework allows prior imaging data to be shared among unaffiliated healthcare facilities while protecting patient privacy with minimal burden on patients, providers, and infrastructure. A prototype has been implemented to demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of this approach.
    Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 08/2012; · 3.57 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Electronic health records and electronic health information exchange are essential to improving quality of care, reducing medical errors and health disparities, and advancing the delivery of patient-centered medical care. In the US correctional setting, these goals are critical because of the high numbers of Americans affected, yet the use of health information technology is quite limited. In this article, I describe the legal environment surrounding health information sharing in corrections by focusing on 2 key federal privacy laws: the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and the federal Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records laws. In addition, I review stakeholder concerns and describe possible ways forward that enable electronic exchange while ensuring protection of inmate information and legal compliance. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print March 13, 2014: e1-e7. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301845).
    American Journal of Public Health 03/2014; · 3.93 Impact Factor

Melissa Goldstein