via MMR of http://medicalstudentblog.co.uk
Legal territory is expanded daily through the technological advancements; specifically within the medical world. As more clinics move to paperless client records and use digital mediums to gather research, collect patient histories, and maintain records, the impact of the increasing risk has become significantly more mainstream. It is important to consider not only the security issues involved with the information, but also the evolution of the contractual agreements between the provider and patient.
Electronic Contracts
“Assuming that all the elements to establish a contract are present, an e-mail or Web contract is valid and enforceable” (Cheeseman, 2006, p. 344).
Electronic contracting creates more availability and near-instant access to products, services and offers. In healthcare settings…
electronic contracting allows for immediate availability of prescription refills, personal histories, billing information, as well as other nearly limitless possibilities.
Electronic Signatures
Electronic signatures are recognized as valid according to the Federal Electronic Signature in Global and National Commerce Act, which increases the speed and efficiency of executed contracts, that is, completed contracts. Taking into consideration the ease of such tasks being completed by electronic signature, the immediate availability will help to boost transactions, services and efficiency. Healthcare professionals will have an easier time searching databases and servers than paper archives.
Cost Savings
Due to the accessibility of e-signatures, much of the paper trail will be reduced or eliminated. Because of the cost-saving involved with eliminating physical records, organizations may be able to pass on the savings to their stakeholders. (In my work office alone, which is still very paper-heavy, approximately 40 reams of paper are consumed monthly. Assuming each ream costs 5 USD, in one year the little office spends $10,400 on paper!) This could possibly help the environment and assist in becoming green; potentially increase their public profile and popularity.
With continuing advancements in security regarding digital signatures, I would guess that their ease and popularity will only increase. Continued utilization will have a long-term positive impact in helping to control medical costs related to maintaining extensive paper records.
Other Considerations
There are many possible pitfalls to digital contracts and e-signatures. The biggest personal concern is the verification required to authenticate whether or not a person is who they say they are. This is especially fundamental given the extremely sensitive and vital nature of the contractual relationship, stemming from the provider-patient relationship. “The verification of electronic signatures is creating a need for the use of scanners and methods for verifying personal information” (Cheeseman, 2006, p. 345). Another concern is security: because of the nature of the data being stored in the servers, an organization may be liable if they do not properly safeguard against people accessing the data. This is especially important in medicine (given that entire and identifying personal medical histories may be digitally accessible) where information of a highly private nature, protected by the HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996 could be available and possible compromise could result in legal action (Public Law 104-191).
Unfortunately, there are ways to steal information. Hackers, digital hijackers, viruses, and unintentional leaks pose risks for all parties involved in e-commerce. Serious consideration needs to be put into the specifics of the technology allowed to verify a person’s identity in order to perform an e-signature. Currently, the Federal Electronic Signature in Global and National Commerce Act is technologically neutral (Cheeseman, 2006, p. 345), leaving many specific details to be decided in the courts.
References
Cheeseman, Henry R. (2006). Contemporary Business and Online Commerce Law, Fifth Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Public Law 104-191. 21 Aug. 1996. P.L. 104-191. Retrieved 26 Oct. 2008 from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/admnsimp/pl104191.htm
