Comparing the security risks of paper-based and computerized patient record systems

Jeff Collmann, Marion C. Meissner, Walid G. Tohme, James Winchester, Seong K. Mun

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

How should hospital administrators compare the security risks of paper-based and computerized patient record systems? There is a general tendency to assume that because computer networks potentially provide broad access to hospital archives, computerized patient records are less secure than paper records and increase the risk of breaches of patient confidentiality. This assumption is ill-founded on two grounds. Reasons exist to say that the computerized patient record provides better access to patient information while enhancing overall information system security. A range of options with different trade-offs between access and security exist in both paper-based and computerized records management systems. The relative accessibility and security of any particular patient record management system depends, therefore, on administrative choice, not simply on the intrinsic features of paper or computerized information management systems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)172-182
Number of pages11
JournalProceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
Volume3035
DOIs
StatePublished - 22 May 1997
Externally publishedYes
EventMedical Imaging 1997: PACS Design and Evaluation: Engineering and Clinical Issues - Newport Beach, United States
Duration: 22 Feb 199728 Feb 1997

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing the security risks of paper-based and computerized patient record systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this