Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparing the security risks of paper-based and computerized patient record systems
Author(s): Jeff R. Collmann; Marion C. Meissner; Walid Gabriel Tohme; James F. Winchester; Seong Ki Mun
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper 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.

Paper Details

Date Published: 22 May 1997
PDF: 11 pages
Proc. SPIE 3035, Medical Imaging 1997: PACS Design and Evaluation: Engineering and Clinical Issues, (22 May 1997); doi: 10.1117/12.274569
Show Author Affiliations
Jeff R. Collmann, Georgetown Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
Marion C. Meissner, Georgetown Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
Walid Gabriel Tohme, Georgetown Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
James F. Winchester, Georgetown Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)
Seong Ki Mun, Georgetown Univ. Medical Ctr. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 3035:
Medical Imaging 1997: PACS Design and Evaluation: Engineering and Clinical Issues
Steven C. Horii; G. James Blaine, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top