Understanding HIT Security Risks – The Ugly Truth!

Join Our Mailing List

On the Privacy and Security of Healthcare Records

Dr. Mata

[By Richard J. Mata, MD, CIS]

There is no privacy …  get over it.

Scott McNealy, Former Sun Microsystems CEO

Storing and transmitting health information in electronic form exposes it to risks that do not exist, or exist to a lesser extent, when the information is maintained in paper.  For example, although both paper-based and electronic systems need protection from fire, water, and wear and tear because of aging, electronic data is also vulnerable to hardware or software malfunctions that can make data inaccessible or become corrupt, and to non-secure policies that can make data vulnerable to illegal access.  In addition, cyber-crimes, and unauthorized intrusions originating both internally and externally, are increasing dramatically every year, costing companies millions of dollars.  Nonetheless, electronic medical records (EMRs) are usually considered more secure than paper patient charts because paper records lack an audit trail, papers are easily lost, and their contents can be illegible.

Take Care the Risks

Healthcare organizations must take the new risks seriously, however, because health information is a vital business asset, and protecting it preserves the value of this asset.  In addition, securing patients’ information protects their privacy and enhances the organization’s reputation for professionalism, patient well-being, and trustworthiness.  Hospitals, emerging healthcare organizations (EHOs), physicians, and healthcare entities long ago recognized the value of health information, and implemented security policies and procedures, but as they move more into the electronic arena, it is vital to revise and update policies and procedures to acknowledge the different risks inherent in the digital age.

Three Components of Security

The three classic components of information security are confidentiality, integrity, and availability.  Donn B. Parker, a pioneer in the field of computer information protection,[1] added possession, authenticity, and utility to the original three.  These six attributes of information that need to be protected by information security measures can be defined as follows:  

  • Confidentiality: The protection and ethics of guarding personal information — for example, being cognizant of verbal communication leaks beyond conversation with associated healthcare colleagues.
  • Possession: The ownership or control of information, as distinct from confidentiality — a database of protected health information (PHI) belongs to the patients.
  • Data integrity: The process of retaining the original intention of the definition of the data by an authorized user — this is achieved by preventing accidental or deliberate but unauthorized insertion, modification or destruction of data in a database.  Make frequent backups of data to compare with other versions for changes made.
  • Authenticity: The correct attribution of origin — such as the authorship of an e-mail message or the correct description of information such as a data field that is properly named.  Authenticity may require encryption.
  • Availability: The accessibility of a system resource in a timely manner — for example, the measurement of a system’s uptime.  Is the intranet available?
  • Utility: Usefulness; fitness for a particular use — for example, if data are encrypted and the decryption key is unavailable, the breach of security is in the lack of utility of the data (they are still confidential, possessed, integral, authentic and available).

Ethics

When these attributes are considered in the healthcare context, another factor comes into play: ethics.  According to Dr. J. A. Magnuson, professor of public health informatics at Oregon Health Science University’s Medical Informatics Program, privacy,[2] security, and ethics are inextricably intertwined, and all are critical to public health’s role as a trustee of the public’s data.  As public health becomes increasingly involved in Electronic Data Interchange (EDI;[3]), the information aspects of privacy, security, and ethics become ever more critical.  All doctors take an ethical oath to protect the patient, and the obligation to uphold this oath extends to health data management, even for employees who do not take an oath.

The fields of medicine and information technology (IT) each have separate and related ethical considerations.  Ethics may prohibit technology, for example, when using a specific application that would make a security breach likely.  However, ethics may also demand technology.  Suppose that a new surveillance application would improve public health — is it not ethically imperative to utilize it to save countless lives?  But suppose it also almost guarantees a security breach — what does the ethical position on use of the application become then?  That is an extreme example, though not completely unrealistic.

FISA

Varied Uses

Complicating the picture is the fact that IT in the healthcare arena has so many and varied uses.  For instance, office-, clinic-, and hospital-based medical enterprise resource planning (ERP) is based on the same back-end functions that a company requires, including manufacturing, logistics, distribution, inventory, shipping, invoicing, and accounting.  ERP software can also aid in the control of many business activities, like sales, delivery, billing, production, inventory management, quality management, and human resources management.  However, other applications particular to the medical setting include the following:

  • The EMR, which has the potential to replace medical charts in the future, is feasible.[4]
  • Healthcare application service providers (ASPs)[5] are available via Internet portals.
  • Custom software production may produce more solution-specific applications.
  • Medical speech recognition systems and implementation are replacing dictation systems.
  • Healthcare local area networks (LANs), wide area networks (WANs), voice-over Internet protocol (IP) networks, Web and ATM file servers are ubiquitous.
  • The use of barcodes to monitor pharmaceuticals is decreasing the chance of medication errors and warns providers of potential adverse reactions.
  • Telemedicine and real-time video conferencing are already a reality.
  • Biometrics will be used more often for data access.
  • Personal digital assistant (PDA) wireless connectivity, which relies on digital or broadband technology including satellites, and radio-wave communications are increasingly common.
  • The use of wireless technology in medical devices will be increasing.

No Healthcare Standardization

All of these applications offer advantages, but the security of these IT methods and devices is not yet fully standardized or familiar to health professionals; despite the CCHIT, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, etc.  They all involve inherent security and privacy risks, and the prudent healthcare organization will want to ensure that these risks are identified and contained.  For instance, a single firewall or intrusion detection system (IDS) may not be enough.

The process must begin by conducting a security risk assessment — that is, doing a thorough assessment of current systems and data, and performing checks such as real-time intrusion testing, validation of data audit trails, firewall testing, and remediation when gaps or failed systems are exposed.  These activities are part of developing a healthcare security plan, including disaster recovery.

Privacy Officers

To ensure that the risk assessment is thorough, hospital network administrators and Privacy Officers should have a working knowledge of federal regulations and of the following security mechanisms:

  • vulnerability assessment;
  • security policy development;
  • risk management;
  • firewall assessment;
  • security application assessment;
  • network security assessment;
  • incident response and recovery assessment;
  • authentication and authorization systems;
  • security products;
  • firewall implementation;
  • public key infrastructure (PKI) design;
  • virtual private network (VPN) design and implementation
  • intrusion detection systems;
  • penetration testing;
  • security program implementation;
  • security policy assessment; and
  • security awareness training.

The federal government has recognized the importance of health information security by establishing regulatory guidance with its Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).

The International Standards Organization

Join Our Mailing List 

IT system managers in healthcare settings are also familiar with the comprehensive security model offered by the International Standards Organization (ISO).  For instance, using ISO’s 17799 Code of Practice for Information Security Management, versions 2000, 2005, or 2010 information security is achieved by implementing a suitable set of controls to govern policies, processes, procedures, organizational structures and software and hardware functions.  The Code requires the IT manager to establish, implement, monitor, review, and where necessary, improve these controls to ensure that the specific security and business objectives of a healthcare organization are met.

Assessment

The work of the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) in developing innovative technology for the healthcare sector is also of interest to IT system managers.  For instance, research on a computer note-writing system that captures clinical data automatically and a data repository system that captures patient data and integrates it with clinical decision support and knowledge bases are two of the initiatives that have originated with NIST.  In addition, the organization publishes numerous Special Publications that provide guidance on how to establish and maintain IT security.

CASE MODEL: HIT Security

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

References:


[1]   Donn B. Parker developed the so-called Parkerian Hexad Principles, which discuss the attributes of information security.

[2]   Privacy generally refers to a ‘people’ context, a state of being free from unauthorized intrusion or invasion.  This concept is as applicable to medical records as it is to your own house.  Confidentiality is viewed more in the context of information, usually dealing with accessing and sharing information or data.

[3]   EDI involves electronic transmission methods, often utilizing networks or the Internet.[3]  The benefits of EDI include speed, data entry savings, and reduction of manual errors; the risks are legion.

[4]   Terms used in the field include electronic medical record (EMR), electronic patient record (EPR), electronic health record (EHR), computer-based patient record (CPR), etc.  These terms can be used interchangeably or generically, but some specific differences have been identified.  For example, an EPR has been defined as encapsulating a record of care provided by a single site, in contrast to an EHR, which provides a longitudinal record of a patient’s care carried out across different institutions and sectors.  However, such differentiations are not consistently observed.

[5]   An application service provider (ASP) is a business that provides computer-based services to customers over a network.

Buy from Amazon

What is the Cost of eHRs?

Join Our Mailing List

A Retrospective Look-Back

By Richard J. Mata; MD CIS CMP™

Studies by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) show that healthcare spending in the U.S. accounts for 16-17% of GDP, which is more than six-seven percentage points higher than the average of 8.9% in other OECD countries.  This translates into per capita health spending of $5,635 in the U.S. compared with median costs of $2,280 in other OECD countries.[1]  Suggestions as to the economic drivers of U.S. health spending include excessive service use, administrative complexity, population aging, threats of malpractice litigation, defensive medicine practices, and the lack of patient waiting lists.  In further comparisons with the OECD countries, it appears the U.S. overpays for physician visits, hospital stays, and pharmaceuticals.

In the Year 2004

A 2004 OECD paper suggested that one way of improving performance would be to move towards EHR:

Health systems should invest in automated health-data systems, including electronic medical records and systems to automate medication orders in hospitals. Better systems for recording and tracking data on patients, health and health care are needed to make major improvements in the quality of care.[2]

In the U.S., possible savings from the adoption of EHR have been projected to reach $142 billion in physician office visits, and $371 billion in hospital costs over a 15-year period.  These projections have not been validated by the experience in other OECD countries where the adoption movement is ahead of U.S. efforts by anything from four to thirteen years.

Nevertheless, the U.S. began its quest to move towards EHR in 2004 as medical software companies began actively marketing their systems, although funding for this endeavor did not come through until 2006.  In spite of this effort, the U.S. has the lowest percentage of physician providers using any EHR compared to Germany, Canada, United Kingdom, and Australia.  The U. S. physicians’ low adoption rate involves fear of the loss of productivity, lack of financial incentives, and high startup costs of as high as $40,000 per physician EHR adoption.

When spending on IT implementation in the healthcare system is compared on an international level, the U.S. lags dramatically behind the major OECD countries.  The U.S. spends $0.43 per capita compared to a high of $193 in the U.K.  This difference is even more dramatic when compared with the German experience, where IT adoption in the healthcare system is almost universal.  In thirteen years, Germany has spent $1.88 billion.  Their annual per capita cost has been $1.63.  The U.S. has reached only 25% of that expenditure so far.

Barriers to Adoption

The greatest barrier to adoption of EHR in most OECD countries has been the need to simplify the health insurance contracts payment structures with standard nomenclatures that can be adapted to EHR.  The major OECD countries also report that there must be a national adoption of IT standards in the healthcare system as well as a national effort to focus on privacy and confidentiality standards.  This assures better coordination of implementation and provides better strategies for adoptions through public incentives and grants.

 

Domestic 5 Year Costs

In the U.S., the five-year costs for a national IT healthcare network have been estimated to be as high as $103 billion in capital and $53 billion in interoperability.  Hospital costs for functionality were estimated to be $51 billion, skilled nursing facilities would bear $31 billion of costs, and physician offices would bear $18 billion of the costs. (Anderson, 2006)  EHR systems that have been implemented have been used mainly for administrative rather than clinical purposes.

In the Year 2005

A 2005 study by Richard Hillestad and colleagues at RAND[3] estimates that implementation of a nationwide EHR network would take about 15 years and cost hospitals about $98 billion and physicians about $17 billion.  Over the 15-year period, the average annual cost to hospitals would be $6.5 billion and the average annual cost to physicians would be $1.1 billion (CQ HealthBeat [1], 9/14). However, if 90% of providers adopted such a network, annual savings would total $81 billion, including $77 billion from improved efficiency and $4 billion from reduced medical errors, the RAND study found.  The study estimates that an EHR network would reduce adverse drug events in inpatient hospital settings by 200,000 annually and reduce such events in ambulatory settings by two million annually, saving $1 billion annually in hospitals and $3.5 billion in ambulatory settings.  For hospitals, about 60% of these savings would be from reduced adverse drug events in patients ages 65 and older, while 40% of savings to ambulatory practices from reduced medication errors would be in patients 65 and older (CQ HealthBeat [1], 9/14).

Assessment

In addition, the study estimates that a national EHR network would save Medicare about $23 billion annually and save private insurers about $31 billion annually.  The study projects that the estimated total annual savings of $81 billion would double if providers followed all checkup reminders and other prompts from the system (AP/Las Vegas Sun, 9/14).  Currently, about 20% to 25% of hospitals and 15% to 20% of physician offices have EHR systems, according to the study (CQ HealthBeat [1], 9/14).

But, what is the estimated cost in 2010?

Join Our Mailing List 

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

References:


[1]    For details of the report, see http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/52/36960035.pdf.

[2]   OECD, Towards High-Performing Health Systems, see http://www.oecd.org/document/26/0,2340,en_2649_37407_31734042_1_1_1_37407,00.htm.

[3]   See http://www.rand.org/health/feature/2006/060414_shekelle.html.  The report is also discussed in some detail in Neergaard, AP/Las Vegas Sun, 9/14/05.  See http://www.ihealthbeat.org/index.cfm?Action=dspItem&itemID=114707.

Product DetailsProduct Details

Product Details

On HIT Continuity Planning

Join Our Mailing List

Setting Up Your HIT Security System

Dr. MataBy Richard J. Mata, MD, CIS, CMP™ [Hon]

In order for a healthcare organization to thrive, it must be able to continue to function no matter what the circumstances are.

When disaster strikes, the organization must mobilize all the talent and resources needed to continue their operations and return to a normal state as soon as possible.

Time is money, and in today’s economy, an hour could be worth thousands of dollars.  Every department in an organization has responsibilities during a disaster.  Planning for a disaster and then dealing with it is a team effort by all parts of an organization.

Phases of Healthcare Business Continuity Planning

A system is required to realize this objective, and part of this system is healthcare entity business continuity planning (BCP).

Phase One: Set up a BCP Project

The first step is to set up a BCP project, which includes feedback from key members from all departments.  Appoint a project manager who has a solid background in the clinical and financial systems and functions that the organization deploys or services it provides.  The project manager can work with business and system analysts to document business flow and interactions with computerized systems that may go down, and how the organization will function on a manual system until service returns.

Phase Two: Review Emergencies and Assess Business Risk

The second phase involves reviewing the different types of emergencies that can arise and assessing the risks to the various business processes already documented.  This is accomplished following a system or service function.

Phase Three: Prepare for Emergencies

The third phase includes identifying of back-ups and recovery strategies to mitigate the effects of an emergency.  A storage area network (SAN) or redundant server could be used as back-ups.

Phase Four: Plan for Disaster Recovery

The fourth phase involves the development of procedures to be followed by a Disaster Recovery Team where human life may be at risk.  A disaster might be caused by weather, sabotage, or electrical power and be specific to the particular organization and its business and IT infrastructure.

Phase Five: Plan for Business Recovery

The fifth phase is critical, and involves developing detailed procedures for the recovery of the business.  Again, the BCP project manager could use each business or service procedure that was documented in phase two and detail which financial or clinical systems are involved, what would be done if the systems were down, and what the plan for recovering the system might be.

Phase Six: Test Business Recovery Procedures

The sixth phase involves simulating authentic emergencies and testing of the business recovery phase.  For example, how would business processes or services be affected by an electrical outage?  How fast can a power generator pick up the outage – and what might happen after a timely pause?  How would patients who were receiving mechanical support be affected?  What would happen to the clinical laboratory?

Phase Seven: Train the Staff

Phase seven covers the training of all employees in the procedures necessary to manage the business recovery process.  These are the procedures tested in phase six, which may require modification.

Phase Eight: Maintain the Currency of the Plan

Phase eight includes treating BCP as a dynamic project to be kept up to date to reflect all changes to business processes and employee structure.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Product DetailsProduct Details