Factors Influencing the Adoption of Advanced Cryptographic Techniques for Data Protection of Patient Medical Records

Objectives

Healthcare organizations that maintain and process Electronic Medical Records are at risk of cyber-attacks, which can lead to breaches of confidentiality, financial harm, and possible interference with medical care. State-of-the-art methods in cryptography have the potential to offer improved security of medical records; nonetheless, healthcare providers may be reluctant to adopt and implement them. The objectives of this study were to assess current data management and security procedures; to identify attitudes, knowledge, perceived norms, and self-efficacy regarding the adoption of advanced cryptographic techniques; and to offer guidelines that could help policy-makers and data security professionals work together to ensure that patient data are both secure and accessible.

Methods

We conducted 12 in-depth semi-structured interviews with managers and individuals in key cybersecurity positions within Israeli healthcare organizations. The interviews assessed perceptions of the feasibility and benefits of adopting advanced cryptographic techniques for enhancing data security. Qualitative data analysis was performed using thematic network mapping.

Results

Key data security personnel did not perceive advanced cybersecurity technologies to be a high priority for funding or adoption within their organizations. We identified three major barriers to the adoption of advanced cryptographic technologies for information security: barriers associated with regulators; barriers associated with healthcare providers; and barriers associated with the vendors that develop cybersecurity systems.

Conclusions

We suggest guidelines that may enhance patient data security within the healthcare system and reduce the risk of future data breaches by facilitating cross-sectoral collaboration within the healthcare ecosystem.

Implementation of a Personalized Digital Application for Pediatric Pre-Anesthesia Evaluation and Education: An Ongoing Usability Analysis and Dynamic Improvement Scheme

BACKGROUND

Pre-anesthesia evaluation session is a basic practice preceding any surgical procedure, aimed at tailoring individualized anesthetic plan per patient, improving safety, and providing patients with educational knowledge and tools in preparation for the surgery day. In the last two decades, electronic health (eHealth) and mobile health (mHealth) settings gradually replaced part of the face-to-face encounters as the platform for pre-anesthesia communication between doctor and patient, yielding a range of benefits as demonstrated in recent publications. Yet, there is a lack of studies examining the effectiveness of surgical mHealth applications focusing on the pediatric preanesthetic setting and addressing their usability among families.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes a dynamic approach for the development process of GistMD's pre-anesthesia mHealth system, a mobile-based educational and management system designed for the pediatric setting.

METHODS

The study was conducted in four departments in a 1500-beds quaternary, academic medical center in Tel Aviv, Israel. During the study period, pre-anesthesia system was sent via text message to families whose children were about to undergo surgery. The system included pre-anesthesia questionnaires, educational videos, downloadable instructions, and consent forms. Ongoing collection and examination of usability data were conducted during the implementation term including responsiveness, effectiveness, and satisfaction indicators. The information collected in each stage was used to draw conclusions regarding potential usability gaps of the system and to plan product adjustments for the following period.

RESULTS

In a period of 141 days of implementation, GistMD pre-anesthesia management system was sent to 769 families. Three product fit actions were applied during this term: (1) Change of text message scheduling, aimed at addressing learnability and accessibility, resulted in a significant increase of 27% (χ2 [1] = 12.65, P<.001) in view rates and 27.4% (χ2 [1] = 30.01, P<.001) in satisfaction rates; (2) Reduce the number of screens, aimed at increasing efficiency and operability, resulted in a significant decrease of 8.6% of cases in which users did not perform any activity on the system after logging in (χ2 [1] = 6.18, P=.02); (3) Patient-focused campaign in two departments aimed at addressing memorability, resulted in significant increases in eight of twelve usability indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that mHealth product-fit decisions derived from theory-based approach and ongoing usability data analysis allow tailoring of most appropriate responses for usability gaps, as reflected in increasing use rates and satisfaction. In the case of the pre-anesthesia management system in the pediatric setting, increased usability conveyed important benefits for patients and families. This work suggests a framework and study methods that may also be applicable in other mHealth settings and domains.

CLINICALTRIAL

What Does the Public Prefer Versus What Is the Public Ready to Forgo?

The present study uses a novel approach to assess the publics' ability to cope with priority setting and rationing in health care by asking what the public is willing to forego. Items for disinvestment were presented in three separated dimensions: Categories of medical care, quality of service, and items representing social values. A telephone survey was conducted among a representative sample of the Israeli public (N = 609). The response rate was 51%. We identify a few items that a high proportion of the population express readiness to forgo: a drug for smoking cessation, budgets for improving appearance and comfort in medical facilities, and a product for preventing surgical scars. Furthermore, over a quarter of the public was ready to forgo many other items. We found that less than 10% justified their selection in terms of "personally not important to me," while most respondents evaluated the items they chose to forgo as "less effective or less essential in comparison to others." The study found that most respondents, when exposed to a range of health system components, were able to identify at least one item that they will be willing to forgo in a time of economic crisis.

Truth-telling and doctor-assisted death as perceived by Israeli physicians

Background

Medicine has undergone substantial changes in the way medical dilemmas are being dealt with. Here we explore the attitude of Israeli physicians to two debatable dilemmas: disclosing the full truth to patients about a poor medical prognosis, and assisting terminally ill patients in ending their lives.

Methods

Attitudes towards medico-ethical dilemmas were examined through a nationwide online survey conducted among members of the Israeli Medical Association, yielding 2926 responses.

Results

Close to 60% of the respondents supported doctor-assisted death, while one third rejected it. Half of the respondents opposed disclosure of the full truth about a poor medical prognosis, and the others supported it. Support for truth-telling was higher among younger physicians, and support for doctor-assisted death was higher among females and among physicians practicing in hospitals. One quarter of respondents supported both truth-telling and assisted death, thereby exhibiting respect for patients’ autonomy. This approach characterizes younger doctors and is less frequent among general practitioners. Another quarter of the respondents rejected truth-telling, yet supported assisted death, thereby manifesting compassionate pragmatism. This was associated with medical education, being more frequent among doctors educated in Israel, than those educated abroad. All this suggests that both personal attributes and professional experience affect attitudes of physicians to ethical questions.

Conclusions

Examination of attitudes to two debatable medical dilemmas allowed portrayal of the multi-faceted medico-ethical scene in Israel. Moreover, this study, demonstrates that one can probe the ethical atmosphere of a given medical community, at various time points by using a few carefully selected questions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12910-019-0350-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Using the social structure of markets as a framework for analyzing vaccination debates: The case of emergency polio vaccination

The framework of the social structure of markets was used to analyze an online debate revolving around an emergency poliovirus vaccination campaign in Israel. Examination of a representative sample of 200 discussions revealed the activity of three parties: authoritative agents promoting vaccinations, alternative agents promoting anti-vaccination, both representing sellers, and the impartial agents, representing the customers-the general public deliberating whether to comply with vaccination or not. Both sellers interacted with consumers using mechanisms of luring and convincing. The authoritative agents conveyed their message by exhibiting professionalism, building trust and offering to share information. The alternative agents spread doubts and evoked negative emotions of distrust and fear. Among themselves, the alternative agents strived to discredit the authoritative agents, while the latter preferred to ignore the former. Content analysis of discussions conducted by the general public reveal reiteration of the messages conveyed by the sellers, implying that the transaction of pro and anti-vaccination ideas indeed took place. We suggest that the framework of the market as a social structure can be applied to the analysis of other vaccination debates, and thereby provide additional insights into vaccination polemics.