Excited to announce that another hospital system has implemented our biometric patient identification solution using iris biometrics to help raise patient safety standards, safeguard patients from medical identity theft and fraud at the point of service, and prevent the creation of duplicate medical records.
Bethesda Health becomes the latest hospital system to implement the RightPatient® biometric patient identification solution using iris recognition.
After carefully evaluating several biometric patient identification solutions, Bethesda Health chose to deploy iris biometrics due to it’s non-contact, hygienic form factor which supports hospital infection control initiatives plus, implementation of RightPatient® poises Bethesda Health to eventually extend the use of the technology to any patient touchpoint along the care continuum that requires patient identification accuracy to ensure optimal outcomes. This is critical foresight by Bethesda staff who recognized that accurate patient identification in the new healthcare paradigm extends far beyond in or outpatient registration within their facilities and should now be addressed holistically by providing secure and accurate patient ID at any point along the care continuum where patients have access to medical care or sensitive personal health information (e.g. patient portals, mHealth apps, home health, etc.).
We welcome Bethesda Health as a trusted partner in the effort to increase patient safety, reduce duplicate medical record rates, eliminate medical identity theft, improve revenue cycle efficiency through the use of our biometric patient identification platform using iris recognition.
We interviewed Jim Bialick, President of The Patient Safety Movement to discuss the topic of patient safety in healthcare.
Patient safety is a topic intertwined with so many policies and procedures in healthcare, many considering it to be the “cornerstone” to deliver quality care. After all, any healthcare organization can be equipped with the latest and most cutting edge care delivery technologies and staff with deep experience in healthcare delivery, but easily fail to recognize the impact on providing holistic patient safety, no matter where a patient falls along the continuum.
Many organizations have materialized with the sole purpose of advancing patient safety in healthcare, but none perhaps more impactful or relevant than The Patient Safety Movement, a Foundation focused on collaborating and breaking down information silos that exist between hospitals, medical technology companies, the government, and other stakeholders that enourages the sharing of data that can identify at-risk patients before they’re in danger and provides specific, actionable solutions that healthcare professionals can implement today to help realize the goal of zero preventable deaths by the year 2020.
We had the pleasure of interview Jim Bialick, President of the Patient Safety Movement for first hand insight on their goals and mission, information about their forthcoming Patient Safety Summit in January 2016. Plus, we had the chance to ask Jim his opinion on the use of biometrics for patient identification in healthcare, the state of patient data integrity in healthcare, and insight into the impact of duplicate medical records. Here is a list of questions covered during our podcast with Jim Bialick and The Patient Safety Movement:
1. What can you tell us about The Patient Safety Movement mission and goals? What steps are you taking and what accomplishments have been realized since you began the movement? 2. I noticed that the Patient Safety Movement is sponsoring the “Patient Safety Movement Foundation Innovation Competition” to encourage advocates to submit innovations to advance the goal of zero preventable deaths by 2020. What can you tell us about the motivation behind creating this award and how you feel it will advance the patient safety initiative? 3. Talk to me for a minute about the upcoming Patient Safety, Science, and Technology Summit in January 2016. What is the significance of this event, why should people attend, and what one message do you hope attendees walk away with? 4. Improving and sustaining patient data integrity in healthcare has gained strong momentum due to its effect on the ability of clinicians to provide accurate, cost effective care to a patient. Due to the increase in patient touchpoints (portals, mHealth apps, kiosks, smartphones) from the rapid digitization of healthcare that provide new ways to access personal health information and receive services, what additional patient safety concerns have you worried that could potentially undermine patient data integrity? 5. It’s often said that accurate patient identification in healthcare is one of the key pillars of protecting patient safety throughout the care continuum. Considering the fact that many healthcare organizations still rely on outdated and ineffective patient matching methodologies, what new patient identification technologies do you see as promising to improve patient identification accuracy and patient data integrity? 6. The growth of biometrics for patient identification presents an opportunity for healthcare organizations to modernize authentication protocols to improve patient safety, eliminate duplicate medical records, and prevent medical identity theft and fraud at the point of service. We recently conducted a survey of 1,067 patients about infection control policies in healthcare and preferences regarding biometric technology and found that 70% prefer a non-contact device. Based on your experience, why do you think this is the case? If evaluating a contact dependent device for patient ID, what would providers need to consider in terms of hygiene and infection control? What are the patient safety risks of using a contact dependent vs. non-contact biometric modality (e.g. palm vein vs. iris recognition) for patient ID in healthcare from an infection control perspective? 7. In The Patient Safety Movement mission statement, you talk about “breaking down the silos” in healthcare. Can you please explain your interpretation of “breaking down the silos” and why do you feel this is an important component to advance the initiative? What distinct advantage does coalescing the fragmented and disparate entities in healthcare have to advance patient safety in healthcare? 8. Why are hospitals allowed to operate under the radar with issues such as duplicates and overlays that pose such a significant risk to patient safety? Who governs this and why isn’t such an industry-wide epidemic made more public so that patients and regulators are made aware? Should there be an industry level of transparency where it is mandated that a hospital’s exposure to such issues is made public, constantly monitored, penalized and regulated?
For a full version of the podcast, please click here.
Our thanks to Jim for his time and wisdom on the topic of patient safety in healthcare! Follow The Patient Safety Movement on Twitter, and please “like” their Facebook page.
Have an idea for a podcast? Drop us an email at: jtrader@rightpatient.com! For a full list of our podcast library, please visit our podcast page.
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/logo3.png119348John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-10-12 18:56:522024-08-28 10:21:39New Podcast Shines Spotlight on The Patient Safety Movement in Healthcare
The following guest post was written by Michael Trader, Co-Founder and President of RightPatient®
The Patient ID Problem
The recurring and complex issue of how to establish and maintain accurate patient identification in healthcare and how to establish a federated patient identity is getting a lot of attention these days. Accurate patient identification in healthcare is a topic that has always garnered attention and concern, but perhaps it has gained momentum and urgency due to the rapid digitization of the industry and the concerted push for interoperability and national health information exchange to improve individual and population health. The push for increased interoperability could make patient data matching errors and mismatches exponentially more problematic and dangerous and it is widely believed that inadequate patient identification continues to jeopardize patient safety and artificially inflate the cost of care.
Can the use of facial recognition biometrics help establish a federated patient identity credential in healthcare?
Opinions on the most effective patient identification and patient matching strategies run the gamut. Some say standardizing patient demographic data will help, others feel that establishing a national patient identifier is the answer to the problem. What’s clear is that in the absence of any broad improvements to patient identification, the goal of establishing longitudinal patient records reflecting a patient’s experience across the care continuum, payers, geographic locations, and stages of life, will remain elusive.
One idea that is catching on with healthcare providers to help improve patient identification in healthcare is capturing a photo during registration that is linked to a unique electronic medical record.
Use of Patient Photos Increasing
Nearly 2.3 million people were victims of medical identity theft in 2014, according to the “Fifth Annual Study on Medical Identity Theft” released earlier this year by the Medical Identity Fraud Alliance (MIFA), an industry trade association of healthcare providers, payers and service providers – a 21% increase over the 2013 number of 1.8 million. Medical identity theft and healthcare fraud continue to be a pervasive problem throughout the industry and in the absence of a solution, the problem is only going to get worse as millions more Americans are brought into the healthcare fold through Obamacare.
To help fight the increase in medical identity theft and to ensure a patient’s identity is accurately verified at each step along the care continuum, many healthcare facilities are capturing a patient’s photo at registration and linking that to a unique electronic medical record. The idea is an attempt to protect patient privacy, ensure accurate insurance benefits and subsequent reimbursement, and connect a face with a name, providing another option for identification besides date of birth. The idea is catching on quickly and many are embracing the use of patient photos to increase security and improve patient safety, but what often goes unrealized is the potential for a patient photo to be leveraged as a unique identification credential across the entire care continuum.
Leveraging Patient Photos for a Federated Identity Across the Care Continuum
Whenever we hear the words “patient identification” most of us envision sitting across a registration desk at a hospital or doctor’s office providing demographic data and our driver’s license and/or insurance card. However, patient identification in healthcare has evolved to now include accurate identification at each and every patient touchpoint along the care continuum including patient portals, mhealth apps, telehealth, and home health just to name a few. One of the smartest strategies to ensure accurate patient identification at any point along the care continuum is to capture a patient’s photo at registration and then leverage that photo along the care continuum through biometric facial recognition technology.
Let’s take patient portals for example. Most of us know that Meaningful Use Stage 2 mandates that healthcare providers provide patients the ability to electronically view, download, and transmit health information. The most popular means to that end is the increasing use of patient portals yet many providers rely on antiquated identification protocols such as user names and passwords to protect access to this personal health information (PHI). The problem is relying on user names, passwords, and/or personal identification numbers (PINs) is risky and could potentially open the door to third party data breaches which are decimating the industry and exposing millions of patients’ PHI.
As an alternative to using user names and passwords, consider a healthcare organization that captures a patient’s photo during registration. Not only is that photo visible to patient registration staff and clinicians at each episode along the care continuum as a second form of multi-factor authentication, but if a patient signs into a patient portal and the hospital has deployed facial recognition identification to authorize a patient’s identity prior to logging in, the hospital has just successfully leveraged that photo as an identification credential for access to their PHI. Same goes for mHealth apps. Biometric patient identification providers that offer the value and flexibility of facial recognition authentication can also help third party developers and healthcare providers add this technology to off-the-shelf (OTS) or custom mHealth apps as a more secure way of identifying patients with the ability to work with any standard camera.
Coupled with the fact that 80% of patients are open to healthcare interactions on smart devices but remain highly sensitive to sharing health data, facial recognition biometrics for accurate identification has already proven itself as a more secure alternative than user names and passwords not to mention the fact that 69% of 16 -24 year olds recently polled indicated they believe biometrics will be faster and easier than passwords and PINs and half foresee the death of passwords by the year 2020.
Writing on the Wall?
With predictions that 50% of smartphones sold by 2019 will have a fingerprint sensor and over a billion biometric mobile devices will ship worldwide by the year 2020 (all equipped with cameras sophisticated enough to use facial recognition), the evolution of patient identification in healthcare is tilting more towards the use of biometrics to replace user names, passwords, and PINs as the preferred method of authentication due to it’s increased security and the flexibility to apply the technology for accurate identification at more patient touchpoints borne from the rapid digitization of the industry. Considering the fact that 41% of consumers stress over smartphone mobile security and biometrics are already overtaking passwords as the de facto identification credential on smartphones, could this be the perfect storm for a rise in the use of facial recognition for accurate patient identification?
Responsible approaches to improving patient identification in healthcare must now include addressing accuracy at any touchpoint where a patient can now access PHI. The advent of facial recognition as a unique identifier in a singular or multi-factor environment is a smart answer to the challenge of ensuring a patient receives accurate care throughout the continuum no matter if they are physically present or accessing services from cyberspace.
Since more patients expect providers to ensure privacy and protect their PHI, is it time to more closely examine implementation of a patient identification solution that leverages biometric facial recognition?
Michael Trader is President and Co-Founder of RightPatient®. Michael is responsible for overseeing business development and marketing activities, government outreach, and for providing senior leadership on business and policy issues.
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/RightPatient-for-accurate-patient-identification-in-healthcare.jpg445800John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-10-07 20:52:162024-10-01 07:59:41In Your Face: The Future of Federated Patient Identification
The following guest post was submitted by Joe Kubilius, Director of Product and Process Management at RightPatient®
Understanding the Digital World
In a world rife with digital devices and electronic gadgets, few of us probably know or understand how they actually work. Think about a smartphone for example – myriad buttons, switches, cameras, lights, and sounds instruct us to swipe this, or press that and we oblige. After all, the complexity of the backend processor and sensor network that makes these devices do what they do is probably of little interest to most of us, myself included.
Did you know that not all biometric patient ID systems have backend matching types that can prevent duplicates, eliminate medical ID theft, and improve patient data integrity? Only 1:N biometric matching has this capability.
Instead what we focus on is the end result – what you see, hear, and experience when you use a digital device. Few would argue that it’s necessary or even mandatory to have a thorough understanding of backend functionality on any digital device in order to appreciate the value it brings to our lives. For biometric patient identification solutions, this is definitely not the case.
Why Biometric Patient ID Technology is Different
Understanding biometric matching types is critical when selecting a patient identification solution. Most of us probably see biometric matching as rather black and white — for example, you place your finger on a fingerprint reader, a backend software program recognizes and verifies your identity, and you are on your merry way. The problem is that backend biometric matching technology is not cookie cutter and there are different matching types that carry different capabilities.
Why is this important to know and understand? We know that most healthcare organizations invest in the use of biometric patient ID solutions to increase patient safety by:
Eliminating medical identity theft and fraud at the point of service
Preventing duplicate medical records and overlays
Achieving and sustaining patient data integrity
Safeguarding personal health information (PHI)
Identifying unconscious or unknown patients
What most people don’t realize is that depending on which biometric matching type you select, achieving these goals is not 100% attainable with select patient ID solutions. The ONLY way to achieve the bulleted objectives is to implement a system that, during patient enrollment, compares a patient’s stored biometric template against ALL stored templates in the biometric database. If the ultimate goal is to improve patient safety and patient data integrity, only a one-to-many (1:N) biometric matching type can accomplish this.
Let’s take a closer look at the available biometric matching types and what they have the ability to do.
Understanding the Differences Between Biometric Matching Types
Biometric matching types can be categorized as: One-to-many or “Identification” (1:N), one-to-one or “Verification” (1:1), and 1:Few Segmented “Identification” (1:Few). Here is a breakdown of each matching type and how to interpret their capabilities:
(1:1)Verification: 1:1 biometric “verification” matching authenticates a patient’s identity by comparing a captured biometric template with a biometric template pre-stored in a database. 1:1 biometric matching rejects or accepts a patient’s identity but before the comparison takes place, hospital staff must first input a personally identifiable credential (e.g. – a date of birth, gender, etc.) prior to comparing a stored biometric template against a live scan. This personally identifiable credential points to a specific enrollment template in the database so using a 1:1 matching type answers the question, “Is a patient who they claim to be.”
Example: A patient walks into the ED. Hospital staff asks the patient for their date of birth then scans the patient’s biometric credential to compare it against the stored template for that patient to verify that the patient is who they claim to be. With 1:1 biometric matching, the registrar has to retrieve a patient’s medical record first. Assuming the patient has been previously enrolled, they then scan their biometric and the system compares the captured data only against the data on file for that medical record.
Takeaway: 1:1 biometric verification is beneficial for verifying a patient’s claimed identity but since it does not search the stored biometric template database in its entirety, it does not have the ability to prevent medical identity theft or fraud at the point of service nor does it have the capability to identify an unconscious or unknown patient since a personally identifiable credential is needed prior to conducting the biometric scan.
(1:Few) Segmented Identification: 1:Few biometric matching compares a patient’s captured biometric template against a segmented portion of the entire biometric database, therefore a personally identifiable credential must be provided prior to the biometric scan to determine the subset of biometric templates to compare against. For example, a patient would provide a date of birth prior to the biometric scan and a 1:Few segmented identification system would then compare that patient’s biometric template only against the templates that share the same date of birth.
Example: A patient arrives at a medical facility for treatment. At registration, hospital staff asks the patient for their date of birth which segments the biometric database to only those records that share the same date of birth and then captures the patient’s biometric credential for comparison against the segmented database.
Takeaway: 1:Few segmented identification does not have the ability to search an entire biometric database in real time to prevent the creation of duplicate medical records or eliminate medical identity theft or fraud at the point of service. What if a patient attempting to commit fraud had previously enrolled their biometric credentials and it was linked to another electronic medical record, then returns to the medical facility claiming another identity and providing a falsified, different date of birth? Hospital staff would then link that patient’s biometric credentials to another electronic medical record and a 1:Few segmented identification matching type would not be able to catch the fraud or prevent a duplicate medical record for this patient. In addition, if a patient arrived unconscious without any identification credentials in the ED, 1:Few segmented identification does not have the ability to identify them because a personally identifiable credential is required. How would an unconscious, unknown patient be able to provide this? Biometric patient ID matching systems based on 1:Few segmented identification do not have the ability to identify unconscious/unknown patients.
(1:N) Patient Identification: A one-to-many (1:N) biometric identification matching system instantly compares a patient’s captured biometric template against ALL stored biometric templates in the system. No other information is required from the patient other than their biometric credentials and this matching type represents the only true de-duplication mechanism and the only way to prevent duplicate medical records to achieve and sustain patient data integrity. 1:N biometric mathcing types ensure that once a patient enrolls, it is impossible to create a duplicate medical record for that patient.
Example: A patient arrives at a hospital for outpatient surgery. At the registration desk, hospital staff takes a patient’s photo with an iris recognition camera. The backend software instantly compares that patient’s biometric credentials to every single stored biometric template in the database.
Takeaway: 1:N biometric matching is the only true way to prevent duplicate medical records and overlays and eliminate medical identity theft and healthcare fraud at the point of service. By searching the ENTIRE biometric enrollment template database, hospital staff ensures that a patient has not tried to claim another patient’s identity, and is able to access the only electronic medical record linked to that patient with confidence. If a healthcare organization seeks to improve and sustain patient data integrity and patient safety, 1:N biometric searches are the only way to accomplish this. In our 1:Few example above, if an unconscious, unknown patient arrived in the ED and a hospital had implemented a biometric patient ID system with 1:N matching, hospital staff would only need to capture the patient’s biometric credential for accurate identification.
Understanding the capabilities and limitations of biometric matching types is key to select a biometric patient ID system that will accomplish the goals of improving patient safety and patient data integrity in healthcare. Take the time to ask the right questions when evaluating a biometric patient ID solutions so you won’t be left in the dark about what a solution can and can’t achieve.
Have you implemented a biometric patient ID system based on 1:1 or 1:Few segmented matching type and did not understand the limitations? Please share your comments and feedback below!
Joe Kubilius is Director of Product and Process Management with RightPatient®. With over 10 years of experience in the design, development, and implementation of biometric identity management solutions, Joe has been integral to the success of hundreds of large and small scale deployments across the globe.
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/One-to-many-biometric-patient-ID-systems-are-the-only-way-to-prevent-duplicate-medical-records.png250650John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-09-23 17:19:362020-08-10 09:55:51The Difference Between 1:N, 1:1, and 1:Few and Why it Matters in Patient ID
Healthcare professionals from around the world discussed the dilemma of achieving accurate patient identification in healthcare during the 09.11.15 #HITsm tweetchat. (Photo courtesy of HL7 Standards)
We had the honor of hosting the weekly #HITsm Twitterchat this past Friday centered on the topic of patient identification in healthcare. For those not aware of the #HITsm weekly chat, the HL7 Standards Web site deftly describes it as:
“…#HITsm is an acronym for “healthcare IT social media” and we focus on current topics that are influencing healthcare technology, health IT, and the use of social media in healthcare.” (courtesy of: http://www.hl7standards.com/hitsm-chat/)
The chat demographic spans a wide range of healthcare professionals — vendors, doctors, patients, industry experts, and even national professional healthcare organizations — all coalescing for one hour each week to discuss a wide range of topics related to health IT.
Considering the importance of establishing accurate patient identification in healthcare and it’s ripple effect to many other aspects of care delivery, interoperability, accountability, and improving individual and population health, we selected this as a topic for the weekly discussion. Included in the discussion was an evaluation and assessment of the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives’ (CHIME) national patient identity challenge to determine if it will actually produce a solution that will eradicate the burdens of matching patient data and bring us closer to establishing higher data integrity, reducing medical errors, and improving care.
Topics for the chat included:
1. Establishing a national patient identifier continues to be a hot debate – will it ever materialize? Are there tangible benefits to a national patient identifier? 2. Will @CIOCHIME’s national patient ID challenge eradicate the burdens of matching patient data and bring us closer to establishing higher data integrity, reducing medical errors, and improving care? 3. Will true healthcare interoperability ever be realized in the absence of fixing the problem of inaccurate patientID? 4. Do patients now have an inherently larger role to ensure the accuracy of their medical records? 5. Does the explosion of mobile devices, telehealth, & mhealth tools raise the urgency level for healthcare providers to implement stronger patient ID technology? 6. What new patient identification technologies show promise to help improve patient matching and interoperability?
Responses, comments, and opinions to these topics were insightful and intelligent. Here is a list of select responses and feedback to some of the topics:
Topic 1: Establishing a national patient identifier continues to be a hot debate – will it ever materialize? Are there tangible benefits to a national patient identifier?
T1: Problem is the lack of a single patient identifier via a Master Patient Index (MPI) for use across the American healthcare system #HITsm
Topic 2: Will @CIOCHIME’s national patient ID challenge eradicate the burdens of matching patient data and bring us closer to establishing higher data integrity, reducing medical errors, and improving care?
T2 #aging populations require a way to connect /coordinate care across multiple LOCs. If no caregiver, this becomes impossible #HITsm
Topic 5: Does the explosion of mobile devices, telehealth, & mhealth tools raise the urgency level for healthcare providers to implement stronger patient ID technology?
T5: Again, use case specific. Many of the use cases today won’t benefit from national pat id… BUT… not say to they won’t #HITsm
A copy of the complete chat transcript can be found here.
As you can see from the selected tweets, the topic of achieving accurate patient identification in healthcare is not easy especially in the context of identifying a solution that can be used as a universal credential. We were pleased that the #HITsm tweet chat participants provided pragmatic, intelligent comments and insight to our questions demonstrating their keen ability to identify the root causes of achieving a national patient identifier and their tacit support for CHIME’s contest and prowess to thrust this complex issue into the national spotlight.
Our thanks to @OchoTex and @michenoteboom for providing us the opportunity to host their weekly #HITsm chat on patient identification in healthcare and for all of the healthcare professionals who participated!
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/COidbzZU8AIbR-J.jpg300600John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-09-14 19:38:442024-11-14 12:08:54#HITsm Tweetchat Highlights Progress, Obstacles for Patient Identification in Healthcare
Join us this Friday from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. CST as we host the weekly #HITsm tweet chat and discuss the conundrum of establishing accurate patient identification in healthcare. The College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME) recently issued a $1 million “national patient ID challenge” in an effort to find a universal solution for accurately matching patients with their health information.
Join us on Friday, September the 11th for the #HITsm tweet chat where we will discuss CHIME’s national patient identifier challenge and the state of patient identification in healthcare.
Patient identification in healthcare has bubbled to the top of the health IT priority list since accurately identifying patients is perhaps the most fundamental element of ensuring data accuracy throughout the care continuum but a confluence of barriers has inhibited advancing initiatives intended to improve it and help increase patient safety.
During the chat we will discuss CHIME’s initiative and debate on whether it truly has the ability to improve patient identification in healthcare plus we will talk in-depth about how inaccurate patient ID effects healthcare interoperability, the evolving patient role to ensure the accuracy of their PHI, new patient touchpoints that complicate the goal of implementing technology that improves identification accuracy, and which new patient identification technologies show promise to help advance accurate patient identification in healthcare.
Please join the discussion beginning Friday at 11 a.m. CST, 12 p.m. EDT by following the #HITsm hashtag.
Additional information about the topic and discussion can be found here.
What additional topics would you like to see added to the conversation on establishing accurate patient identification in healthcare?
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/HITsm-tweet-chat-logo-090815.jpg445800John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-09-08 19:13:382021-06-25 11:21:08RightPatient® to Host September 11th #HITsm Chat on Patient Identification in Healthcare
LinkedIn has emerged as one of the most important social platforms to collaborate, educate, network, and publish content. Professionals from around the globe use LinkedIn as a way to establish and cultivate relationships, leveraging its communication capabilities to establish relevance and demonstrate expertise on just about any topic you can imagine.
The relevance of biometric technology to improve patient identification and SSO in healthcare is a main focus of the new “Biometrics in Healthcare” LinkedIn Group.
LinkedIn “Groups” are an integral tool to categorize discussions that center on a particular topic or subject matter and a chance to learn and converse from some of the most trusted global experts in their respective fields. In that spirit, we have created a brand new LinkedIn Group centered on the use of biometrics in healthcare. Biometrics in Healthcarewas created to help advance discussions on the use of this technology for patient identification and single sign-on (SSO) in the industry but more importantly, it was established to help others understand and appreciate the benefits of using biometrics including:
Testimonials
Case studies
Examples of return on investment (ROI)
Technology updates
Clearing up misunderstandings on what biometrics can and can’t accomplish
We invite you to join the Biometrics in Healthcare LinkedIn Group and participate in the discussion. It’s your chance to ask questions, read more about how the use of biometrics is helping increase patient safety and improve data integrity across the industry and interact with professionals who understand the benefits and limitations of this technology.
Expect the significance and impact of biometrics in healthcare to grow in the coming years as more hospitals and healthcare organizations understand its value and flexibility. The new Biometrics in Healthcare LinkedIn Group will prove to be an important tool for healthcare professionals to use in their quest to research the technology and determine if their facility can benefit from its use.
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/LinkedIn-flickr-010917.jpg445800John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-08-31 18:09:402021-06-25 10:47:24Join the Biometrics in Healthcare LinkedIn Group
Accurate patient identification and data matching in healthcare to ensure patient safety along the care continuum is a complex challenge for most healthcare organizations. Common names, lack of proper ID, identity swapping, and the explosion of new patient touchpoints (mHealth apps, patient portals for example) to access personal health information (PHI) has created problems for organizations that still rely on antiquated methods of identifying patients and places them at a high risk of committing medical errors that could jeopardize patient safety.
The increased complexities of achieving accurate patient identification in healthcare raise questions about the most suitable strategies to implement. Join us on September the 10th from 1 – 2pm EDT for a free webinar on patient identification in healthcare.
Achieving accurate patient identification in healthcare is a key strategic goal of healthcare organizations across the industry as they continue to explore new technologies that have the ability to meet modern demands of the new digital health paradigm in the wake of the shift to a patient-centered wellness approach and a push to better understand the individual patient. Unified views of patient data across any care setting is a growing necessity despite the variability in data capture methods, systems, and a lack of patient identification industry standards.
In the absence of a unified view of patient data, healthcare organizations will continue to make medical errors with incomplete or inaccurate information. Access to accurate, complete PHI is one of, if not the most vital component to deliver quality, cost-effective care and the only way to accomplish this is to establish accurate patient ID at the point of registration/access so the patient’s entire medical history supports immediate care or a wellness event. Complete and accurate medical histories must be linked to any point along the care continuum to truly achieve patient-centered care.
Join us on September the 10th for a free webinar on the state of patient identification in healthcare and a comprehensive overview of strategies and technologies healthcare organizations can use to improve and sustain accurate patient ID. Plus, we will address the growing use of biometrics for patient ID, explain how it’s being used, and what return on investment (ROI) hospitals have realized since implementing it at their facilities.
Topics covered during the free one-hour webinar include:
• The current state of patient identification in healthcare • Patient identification challenges • Using biometrics for patient ID across the care continuum
Join us on September the 10th from 1pm – 2pm EDT as we explore the topic of patient identification in healthcare and offer an overview of how biometrics is a viable solution to increase patient ID accuracy and patient safety along the care continuum.
Tell a friend or colleague! This is your chance to learn from experts in patient identification, ask questions, and engage in the discussion. Have a question you would like to ask during the webinar? Please visit the webinar landing page to sign up and leave your question or write it in the comments below.
Looking forward to seeing you on September the 10th!
https://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/free-webinar-2.jpg445800John Traderhttps://www.rightpatient.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/RightPatient-Logoup.pngJohn Trader2015-08-25 16:52:312021-06-25 10:29:03Free Webinar: The State of Patient Identification in Healthcare
The explosion of mHealth apps and patient portals for PHI access demands more modern patient and clinician identification technologies than user names and passwords.
The following guest post was submitted by Michael Trader, President and Co-Founder of RightPatient®
The rise of digital health tools for PHI access
Encouraging patients to take a more active and engaged role in their healthcare has been a key focus of healthcare providers in the wake of Meaningful Use requirements. What began as an industry mission with specific benchmarks and goals has since manifested into the actual use of myriad digital tools and platforms that are educating, engaging, and working to empower patients to increase accountability and responsibility for their own health and, when applicable, the health of their families. In fact, a recent HIMSS survey on how mobile apps and portals improve patient engagement indicated that on the provider side:
73% of organizations used app-enabled patient portals to increase consumer participation in their overall health and wellness goals as well as meet relevant Stage 2 and Stage 3 Meaningful Use requirements under the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Incentive Programs.
Nearly half of those polled stated that “implementation of mobile services for access to information is a high priority at their organization.” Additionally, more than half – 57 percent – indicated that their facility implements a mobile technology policy, which often has a focus on mobile health security capabilities.
About one-third of polled healthcare organizations stated that they provide “organizational-specific apps” to the patient community.
One important facet in the goal to improve patient engagement is providing easier and faster access to personal health information (PHI). Manifested through Meaningful Use Stage 2, the benchmark is stated as:
The idea is for healthcare providers to reach beyond traditional means of accessing PHI (think in person visits) and adopt digital health tools for easier, faster, and more convenient ways of accessing this data (think patient portals and provider mHealth apps). In concept, increasing the availability of tools and platforms to access PHI is a good thing — it caters to increasing patient demand to offer greater PHI accessibility through resources that offer more convenience and are in lockstep with the rise of the digital health movement. However, the explosion of digital tools for PHI access carries an inherent risk that patient identities will be compromised, stolen, or shared leading to a sharp increase in fraud and medical ID theft that poses a direct threat to not only patient safety and provider medical error liability, but also to the rising cost of healthcare. Not to mention the fact that the rising use of digital tools to access PHI compromises patient data integrity which is critical to maintain because of the ripple effect it has on the ability to provide accurate care along the continuum and the confidence it represents to successfully participate in health information exchanges (HIEs).
Keep in mind that each time a perpetrator commits healthcare fraud or medical ID theft, the fallout of legal fees, settlement costs, and expenses to restore an identity are passed down to ALL patients in the form of higher fees for medical services. Therefore, collectively there is a pressing need to ensure that adoption of stricter and more secure methods of patient identification must run parallel to the rise in digital tools and platforms for safe access to PHI. Otherwise, patients may not be as willing to use these tools for fear of medical ID theft or unlawful access to their PHI data which directly compromises their safety, security, and privacy.
Monetary damages are only the tip of the iceberg for healthcare organizations when discussing the impact of fraud and medical ID theft. It was been well documented that reputation can be negatively effected when patients perceive or a data breach confirms that healthcare providers are not taking the necessary action to increase PHI access security.
How can we correlate an increase in quality patient engagement with secure PHI access? Patient engagement is, without a doubt, a key linchpin to the success of healthcare’s triple aim. Simply stated, it is not possible for the healthcare industry to achieve the goals of lower costs, an enhanced patient experience, and improving population health in the absence of strong and sustainable patient engagement.
Securing PHI access for higher levels of patient engagement
Scour the internet for articles that cover patient willingness to use digital health IT tools to access PHI and you will discover that despite the industry wide effort to adopt tools that provide more convenient and faster access to medical data, few patients are actually doing so. In fact, a recent survey revealed that just 21% of respondents said they use the Web to access their health data. Meanwhile, 10% said they use e-mail and 40% view the data in person.
The reason behind patient unwillingness to use mHealth tools and portals for PHI access runs the gamut from dissatisfaction with mobile health applicationsto challenges in finding and using instructions, data inaccuracy, and device malfunctions or data syncing issues. Furthermore, issues related to poor mHealth app and portal securityhave hampered more widespread adoption of these tools and stoked patient fears that their privacy could be compromised by using them.
Setting aside those with opinions that privacy can never exist in the healthcare industry, the link between patient confidence and trust that their identities and PHI are protected when using mHealth apps or patient portals is palatable and has a direct effect on their willingness to use these tools as part of their overall care.
First, it’s important to distinguish the difference between “privacy” and “security” as it applies to healthcare data. HIMSS does an excellent job of breaking down the differences:
“Privacy” is the right of an individual to make choices with respect to the collection, use and disclosure of their data; “security” is the safeguards – physical, administrative and technological – used to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the data. Because the challenges are many, there is a tendency to focus on “security” in mHealth. Patient privacy cannot be achieved without adequate data safeguards; however secure devices do not necessarily preserve patient privacy.
One of the largest impediments to widespread adoption of mHealth tools, portals, and other digital health platforms is inadequate mobile security policies that fail to take into account the necessity of adopting more modern patient identification tools that are commensurate to the data they protect. For example, most healthcare providers continue to use user name and passwords to protect patient identities when using mHealth tools and portals. While these may have once been permissible security protocols in the past, these identity verification methods are now considered antiquated and should be replaced. Even though user names and passwords have proven to no longer be secure enough to protect patient identities, almost all healthcare providers still rely on their use for mHealth apps and patient portals.
Secure PHI access requires modern patient and clinician ID technology
If healthcare providers expect patients to adopt mHealth tools and patient portals as a more convenient way to access PHI, the implementation of stronger and more secure identification technology is critical. Most healthcare security experts agree that due to the large amount of PHI data moving across provider locations via mHealth apps and patient portals, stronger security is needed to prevent data breaches if a patient’s identity is compromised. Plus, the increasing complexity of mHealth apps and their distinct ability to sync PHI data across multiple devices raises important questions about how to properly protect patient privacy to ensure HIPAA compliance for these new tools.
Securing PHI access is not limited to patient interactions with mHealth tools or patient portals however. A sound strategy to secure mobile and remote access to this sensitive data is required not only for patients, but also for any clinician that has access to mobile technologies. A 2014 HIMSS Analytics Mobile device study reported that:
…approximately one-quarter of US hospitals (28 percent) reported that smartphones are in use at their organization. On average, 169 devices are deployed per hospital. In comparison, 24 percent of US hospitals reported that tablet computers are in use at their organization, with an average of 37 devices deployed per hospital. (source – https://capsite.himssanalytics.org/assets/Uploads/2014-Mobile-Essentials-Brief-TOC12914.pdf)
Healthcare organizations must plan to implement a technology that has the flexibility to be used for secure patient and clinician identification, usually through a strategic combination of a strong single sign-on (SSO) platform to establish strict identification checks and provide a concrete audit trail of data access history with an enterprise-wide patient ID solution to secure remote access to PHI from mHealth apps and patient portals. The modern identification technology of choice for many healthcare providers to meet the rising demand for tighter security to access PHI is biometrics.
Lack of a strong PHI access policy can also have a negative impact on provider reputation. In a recent report on medical identity theft by The Ponemon Institute, 79% of patients surveyed said it is “very important” for healthcare providers to ensure the privacy of health records and allow them to have direct control of their health records.
Why biometrics?
The HIPAA Privacy Rule requires healthcare organizations to secure remote access to PHI data as a safeguard for patient privacy and to eliminate data breaches that can lead to fraud and medical identity theft. Once considered secure identification criteria, user names and passwords are now considered antiquated and unable to offer strong protection to secure PHI access largely due to the fact that:
Most patients don’t want to worry about memorizing a complex password and thus default to using a simplistic password that’s easily guessable.
Most patients use the same password for many accounts, resulting in one key that unlocks dozens (or hundreds) of doors.
Most patients don’t even keep their passwords in secret. Everything from Netflix accounts to bank accounts to web accounts to video game accounts are often shared between friends, family members, and even strangers.
The use of biometrics for individual identification poses a much more secure and flexible technology to address the pressing need for healthcare to adopt stricter PHI access security protocols. Why?
We have written extensively about the applicability of biometric patient identification to improve patient safety in healthcare. Biometrics relies on identifying patients and clinicians by who they are, rather than what they have (ID badges) or what they know (user names, passwords) which can be more easily stolen or shared. Biometric identification technology is a more secure method to identify patients in self-driven interactions by allowing them to use the camera or microphone on their smartphone or tablet and use facial or voice recognition biometrics for accurate authentication. Biometrics offers more flexibility and convenience because it has the ability to be implemented at patient touchpoints where user name and password entry would be cumbersome and inappropriate — home health settings for example.
The use of biometrics for identification also offers a concrete PHI access audit trail, a more accurate tracking mechanism than user names or passwords which can easily be shared and often skew analytics because it’s impossible to determine the actual individual using the credentials. This is important because litigation often relies on these audit trails used in the defense of medical identity theft or healthcare fraud claims.
Conclusion
Participation in portals and the use of mHealth and other mobile apps to access PHI is a key catayst to increase patient engagement in healthcare. Patients must have the confidence in their healthcare provider that their PHI is easily accessible and protected with the strongest authentication security on the market that ensures their privacy and safety. User names and passwords are no longer sufficient authentication credentials to meet the expanding need to offer a more flexible, scalable, and more secure identification technology for mHealth apps and patient portals.
Equally important is protecting clinician access to sensitive PHI data. Protocols must be implemented that abandon user names and passwords in favor of technologies such as biometrics that are more secure, less susecptible to being stolen or shared, and leave a concrete PHI data access audit trail.
Have questions about the use of biometrics for patient identification in healthcare? Feel free to leave a comment or question below.
The following guest post was written by Brian Bilia, Enterprise Sales Consultant with RightPatient®
More Schools Using Non-Contact Biometrics for Individual Identification
In case you missed it, this week Virginia Commonwealth University announced the implementation of iris recognition in their on-campus dining halls for student identification. In addition to presenting a safer and more secure way to identify students the deployment according to the article, the initiative is designed to be:
“…helpful for students who forget or lose their IDs over the weekend, as there is not a way to get a replacement card over the weekend.” (USA Today, “New iris cameras at Va. school scan students’ eyes for entry into dining hall” http://usat.ly/1L4cbWb)
If schools adopt iris biometrics for student ID based on it’s non-contact, hygienic form factor, shouldn’t the healthcare industry offer the same protection to patients?
The article goes on to report that one of the main reasons Virginia Commonwealth and another schools chose to deploy iris recognition was because of its non-contact, hygienic feature:
“VCU is following in the steps of other schools — including George Mason University — which introduced the eye scanning system last year. Both schools opted for the this non-contact form of biometric technology — as opposed to a fingerprint scanner — because it is less invasive and won’t spread germs.” (USA Today, “New iris cameras at Va. school scan students’ eyes for entry into dining hall” http://usat.ly/1L4cbWb)
Essentially, hygiene played a critical role in determining which biometric modality the school would use for student identification. Due to the fact that iris recognition does not require physical contact with a biometric device, it presents one of the most hygienic hardware options available, keeping end users safe from the spread of germs and illness that could otherwise be a risk when using a contact dependent modality such as fingerprint or palm vein recognition. The fact that schools continue to adopt iris recognition for identification due to it’s hygienic, non-contact features begs the question — shouldn’t hospitals adopting biometric patient identification tools be investigating non-contact biometric modalities too?
Non-Contact, Hygienic Biometric Patient ID in Healthcare
In the healthcare industry, patient safety is the #1 priority. Rising conscientiousness about new strategies to keep patients safe rise combined with the explosion of digital health tools has pushed hospitals to re-assess hospital acquired condition (HAC) control policies and implement new platforms and monitoring programs that provide a safer and more hygienic environment for patient care. In addition, new policies by Medicare now penalize hospitals with high HAC rates raising the level of urgency to adopt digital health tools that support hospital infection control policies.
In lockstep with the urgency to increase patient safety in any possible way, hospitals and healthcare organizations are quickly catching on to the benefits of using biometrics for patient identification as a means to increase patient safety but what they are also discovering is that not all biometric hardware modalities have the ability to offer a non-contact, hygienic experience. Biometric hardware that requires physical contact by a patient can be interpreted as non-hygienic and raises the risk of HAC’s if the device is not properly sanitized after each use. Even when properly sanitized, these devices still pose a threat to patient safety due to the fact that cleaning agents do not have the ability to remove 100% of germs or bacteria.
Despite the advantages of using iris recognition for patient ID in healthcare, certain stigmas exist about this technology that may make a healthcare organization hesitant to adopt. Many feel that iris recognition is too invasive and beams visible light into a patient’s eyes to determine their identity. In reality, iris recognition is often confused with retinal scanning which does use visible light for identification. Iris recognition instead uses camera technology with subtle infrared illumination to acquire images of the detail-rich, intricate structures of the iris. It’s 100% safe, and our field research has proven that patients are overwhelmingly accepting of using iris recognition for identification when presented with the option to protect them from duplicate medical records, fraud, and medical ID theft.
Iris recognition has proven to be one of the most popular biometric modalities for individual identification for a number of reasons, including it’s non-contact, hygienic form factor that protects end users from germs and bacteria that otherwise exist on alternative biometric hardware devices. Hygiene has a rising influence in determining which hardware modality is utilized in biometric identification management projects, and the advantages of using iris recognition biometrics has positioned the technology for strong adoption growth in the years to come.
How important is hygiene to you when selecting a biometric hardware modality?
Brian joined RightPatient in July 2015 as Enterprise Sales Consultant for the Midwest Region. Prior to RightPatient, Brian held several roles in sales management and new business development achieving over 15 years of experience working with the healthcare/hospital industry.
