Skip header and navigation

Refine By

3 records – page 1 of 1.

Shared Electronic Health Record Systems: Key Legal and Security Challenges.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature292507
Source
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 Nov; 11(6):1234-1239
Publication Type
Journal Article
Date
Nov-2017
Author
Ellen K Christiansen
Eva Skipenes
Marie F Hausken
Svein Skeie
Truls Østbye
Marjolein M Iversen
Author Affiliation
1 Norwegian Centre for Integrated Care and Telemedicine, University Hospital of North Norway (UNN), Tromsø, Norway.
Source
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 Nov; 11(6):1234-1239
Date
Nov-2017
Language
English
Publication Type
Journal Article
Keywords
Access to Information - legislation & jurisprudence
Computer Security - legislation & jurisprudence
Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence
Electronic Health Records - legislation & jurisprudence
Health Policy
Humans
Information Dissemination - legislation & jurisprudence
Norway
Patient care team
Policy Making
Telemedicine - legislation & jurisprudence
Ulcer - diagnosis - therapy
Abstract
Use of shared electronic health records opens a whole range of new possibilities for flexible and fruitful cooperation among health personnel in different health institutions, to the benefit of the patients. There are, however, unsolved legal and security challenges. The overall aim of this article is to highlight legal and security challenges that should be considered before using shared electronic cooperation platforms and health record systems to avoid legal and security "surprises" subsequent to the implementation. Practical lessons learned from the use of a web-based ulcer record system involving patients, community nurses, GPs, and hospital nurses and doctors in specialist health care are used to illustrate challenges we faced. Discussion of possible legal and security challenges is critical for successful implementation of shared electronic collaboration systems. Key challenges include (1) allocation of responsibility, (2) documentation routines, (3) and integrated or federated access control. We discuss and suggest how challenges of legal and security aspects can be handled. This discussion may be useful for both current and future users, as well as policy makers.
Notes
Cites: J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011 May 01;5(3):768-77 PMID 21722592
Cites: Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;169:417-21 PMID 21893784
Cites: JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 Jul 18;5(3):e148 PMID 27430301
PubMed ID
28560899 View in PubMed
Less detail

Access and benefits sharing of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in northern Canada: understanding the legal environment and creating effective research agreements

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature284320
Source
Pages 912-920 in N. Murphy and A. Parkinson, eds. Circumpolar Health 2012: Circumpolar Health Comes Full Circle. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress on Circumpolar Health, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA, August 5-10, 2012. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 2013;72 (Suppl 1):912-920
Publication Type
Article
Date
2013
  1 document  
Author
Geary J1, Jardine CG, Guebert J, Bubela T.
Author Affiliation
School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Source
Pages 912-920 in N. Murphy and A. Parkinson, eds. Circumpolar Health 2012: Circumpolar Health Comes Full Circle. Proceedings of the 15th International Congress on Circumpolar Health, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA, August 5-10, 2012. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 2013;72 (Suppl 1):912-920
Date
2013
Publication Type
Article
Digital File Format
Text - PDF
Physical Holding
University of Alaska Anchorage
Keywords
Access to Information/legislation & jurisprudence
Biomedical Research/legislation & jurisprudence
Biomedical Research/organization & administration
Canada
Community-Institutional Relations/legislation & jurisprudence
Culture
Financing, Government
Genetics, Medical/legislation & jurisprudence
Genetics, Medical/organization & administration
Health Policy
Humans
Indians, North American/ethnology
Indians, North American/genetics
Indians, North American/legislation & jurisprudence
Documents
Less detail

Attitudes to sharing personal health information in living kidney donation.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature144792
Source
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Apr;5(4):717-22
Publication Type
Article
Date
Apr-2010
Author
Patricia Hizo-Abes
Ann Young
Peter P Reese
Phil McFarlane
Linda Wright
Meaghan Cuerden
Amit X Garg
Author Affiliation
London Kidney Clinical Research Unit, Room ELL-101, Westminster, London Health Sciences Centre, 800 Commissioners Road East, London, Ontario N6A 4G5, Canada.
Source
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Apr;5(4):717-22
Date
Apr-2010
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Access to Information - legislation & jurisprudence
Adult
Aged
Attitude of Health Personnel
Confidentiality - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
Health Policy
Health Records, Personal
Humans
Informed Consent - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Kidney Transplantation - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Living Donors - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Male
Middle Aged
Ontario
Patient Education as Topic
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Questionnaires
Abstract
In living kidney donation, transplant professionals consider the rights of a living kidney donor and recipient to keep their personal health information confidential and the need to disclose this information to the other for informed consent. In incompatible kidney exchange, personal health information from multiple living donors and recipients may affect decision making and outcomes.
We conducted a survey to understand and compare the preferences of potential donors (n = 43), potential recipients (n = 73), and health professionals (n = 41) toward sharing personal health information (in total 157 individuals).
When considering traditional live-donor transplantation, donors and recipients generally agreed that a recipient's health information should be shared with the donor (86 and 80%, respectively) and that a donor's information should be shared with the recipient (97 and 89%, respectively). When considering incompatible kidney exchange, donors and recipients generally agreed that a recipient's information should be shared with all donors and recipients involved in the transplant (85 and 85%, respectively) and that a donor's information should also be shared with all involved (95 and 90%, respectively). These results were contrary to attitudes expressed by transplant professionals, who frequently disagreed about whether such information should be shared.
Future policies and practice could facilitate greater sharing of personal health information in living kidney donation. This requires a consideration of which information is relevant, how to put it in context, and a plan to obtain consent from all concerned.
Notes
Cites: Am J Transplant. 2003 Jul;3(7):830-412814474
Cites: Am J Transplant. 2009 Jul;9(7):1558-7319459792
Cites: Transplantation. 2004 Aug 27;78(4):491-215446304
Cites: Lancet. 1992 Oct 3;340(8823):807-101357243
Cites: Can J Surg. 2004 Dec;47(6):408-1315646438
Cites: Transplantation. 2005 Mar 27;79(6 Suppl):S53-6615785361
Cites: HIV Med. 2006 Apr;7(3):133-916494626
Cites: Ann Intern Med. 2006 Aug 1;145(3):185-9616880460
Cites: J Pers Assess. 2006 Dec;87(3):305-1617134338
Cites: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006 Nov;1(6):1148-5317699340
Cites: Am J Transplant. 2008 Sep;8(9):1878-9018671676
Cites: Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008 Oct;23(10):3316-2418599559
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 12;360(11):1096-10119279341
Cites: J Med Ethics. 2009 Apr;35(4):270-119332587
Cites: Kidney Int. 2009 May;75(10):1088-9819225540
Cites: Am J Transplant. 2004 Oct;4(10):1553-415367208
PubMed ID
20299371 View in PubMed
Less detail