Category: Uncategorized

Understanding the Term Telemedicine

TELEMEDICINE OVERVIEW

Electronic health (e-Health) is the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) for health (WHO, 2018), and includes; telehealth, telemedicine, mobile health (mHealth), eLearning, and electronic health records or electronic medical records (Pan American Health Organization, 2018). Telehealth, defined in 1978 by (Bennett et al., 1978) as “the application of telecommunications-based technology in the delivery of healthcare and related services”. Telehealth is a broad term and is considered to incorporate “health related activities beyond patient care including patient and provider education and management of health services” (Bashshur and Shannon, 2010). Telemedicine, which is a subset of telehealth refers to “the delivery of healthcare services, where distance is a critical factor, by all health care professionals using ICT for the exchange of valid information for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of disease and injuries, research and evaluation, and for the continuing education of healthcare providers, all in the interests of advancing the health of individuals and their communities” (WHO, 2010). Therefore, telemedicine allows healthcare professionals to evaluate, diagnose and treat patients at a distance using telecommunications technology (Chiron Health, 2017). Indeed, (Bashshur et al., 2011) stated that telehealth relates to telemedicine the same way that health relates to medicine. It has also been stated that “telemedicine offers people the opportunity to address common medical issues in an efficient, timely and professional manner, using their smart phones, computers and other devices” (Dinesen et al., 2016). It is felt that using telemedicine may assist in overcoming the acute shortage of human resources for health in the low income countries in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) and accelerate progress towards universal health coverage  through  services such as disease surveillance, tele-consultation, tele-education and research (Miseda et al., 2017; WHO, 2006).

TELEMEDICINE MODES OF DELIVERY
In general, telemedicine can be provided either synchronously (real time transmission; e.g., video conferencing), asynchronously (store and forward; e.g., e-mail), or using hybrid solutions.

Synchronous telemedicine: Synchronous telemedicine occurs in “real-time” and is a two-way communication between participants (usually the patient and their healthcare provider and specialist at a distance) (Kaufman et al., 2009). This mode of telemedicine most commonly uses videoconferencing in its various forms and can be supplemented by external peripheral devices such as digital stethoscopes, otoscopes, dermascopes, and ultrasound devices etc that can be used for remote patient examination.  It can also include the use of live bio-signal monitoring, interactive robotic equipment. The advantage of synchronous telemedicine is that it is live and interactive and provides benefits such as time saving for both the patient and the healthcare provider, improved access to healthcare, improved quality of life, and also allowing a patient to connect with a medical expert from the comfort of their community and at a convenient time (Whitten et al., 2010). However, synchronous telemedicine comes with disadvantages as it is entirely technology-based, expensive, and requires adequate bandwidth (Pappas, 2015). It also requires the co-ordination of the consultations and the patient and provider having to go to a videoconference venue (WHO, 2010).

Asynchronous telemedicine: This form of telemedicine involves gathering and storing clinically relevant patient information or data, and electronically transmitting it at a later time for interpretation by a medical expert at another location and at a later time. This is most commonly done by email, or through a Web site or more recently using mobile phone instant messaging applications. Asynchronous telemedicine is becoming simpler as mobile phones can gather photographs, video, and sound recordings and transmit them by email, the Web and cellular networks (Deshpande et al., 2009). In developing countries, particularly rural areas with a gap in healthcare provision, asynchronous telemedicine would be relevant (Combi et al., 2016; Toh et al., 2016). This is mainly due to the various benefits for both patients and healthcare providers; reduction in waiting time, reduction in unnecessary referrals and improved standard and quality of care (Deshpande et al., 2009). Other benefits are cost effectiveness (it does not require high end or special technology hardware, and also uses email or web applications) as the form of communication for later review by the specialist (Malhotra et al., 2013). The shortcomings of asynchronous telemedicine are the lack in instant feedback, personal interaction, live collaboration and real time activities, which lead to lack of motivation, and calls for self-discipline (Pappas, 2015). Other shortcomings are that it is dependent on the quality and quantity of data provided, and because it is not synchronous it is not appropriate for emergency care (WHO, 2010).

Hybrid telemedicine: Originally, telemedicine was only categorised into asynchronous and synchronous solutions, but technologies are converging to allow technology applications that can do both ‘real-time’ and ‘store-and-forward’ services (Whitten et al., 2010). Hybrid telemedicine is a combination of both synchronous and asynchronous telemedicine (Bhatia, 2015). Examples are the use of store and forward telemedicine to send images and a brief history (asynchronous) followed by a telephone call (synchronous) to discuss the images and history (Mars and Scott, 2017).

BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF TELEMEDICINE

Telemedicine is used globally, and in some areas (teleradiology / teledermatology) has gained traction in developed countries. Large scale implementation still lags in many telehealth areas in developed countries, and in particular in developing countries. It is felt that using telehealth may assist in overcoming the acute shortage of human resources for health in the low income countries and accelerate progress towards universal health coverage  through  services such as; disease surveillance, tele-consultation, tele-education and research (Miseda et al., 2017). Although telemedicine has many benefits to offer, challenges still remain. These are summarized below.

The literature shows that telemedicine can save patients time and money to access healthcare services (Hassibian and Hassibian, 2016). These authors have explained several benefits of telemedicine such as bridging the rural-urban gap; reducing healthcare costs; facilitating continuing medical education (CME); improving quality of healthcare; reducing clinician’s workload; reducing medical errors; changing the relationship between physicians and patients; improving access to information; and finally the convenience of tele-homecare (Hassibian and Hassibian, 2016). Other potential benefits include timelier access to providers; decreased hospital readmissions; reduced use of institutional care; reduction or prevention of complications; improved access to patient training and educational resources; and improved continuity of care and case management (Hodgson, 2018). The American Telemedicine Association (ATA) has also identified four areas of telemedicine that can be of benefit, these are: providing access to healthcare services to distant patients; reducing the cost of healthcare in chronic disease management; improving quality of healthcare and patient satisfaction; and increasing demand to seek healthcare (ATA, 2018).

Prior studies have concluded that there is a positive correlation between cost effectiveness and efficiency using telemedicine (Dixon et al., 2016; Marios-Nikolaos and Charalambos, 2017; Thomas et al., 2014). This is especially so for chronic disease monitoring of vital signs (Perego et al., 2017; Rubio et al., 2017). Telemedicine services create a positive perception among patients and care takers as they continue to look at the service for convenience, comfort, and decreased out-of-pocket expenses. For instance, in a study on patient experience with video visits it was reported that all patients surveyed were satisfied with video physician consultations, and the majority said they were open to provider follow-up through virtual visits (Powell et al., 2017). Armaignac et al. compared the effect of the addition  of telemedicine to  progressive care units (PCU) and found telemedicine  significantly decreased mortality,  hospital, and PCU length of stay despite the fact patients in telemedicine PCU group were older and had higher disease severity, and risk of mortality than those in the PCU control group (Armaignac et al., 2018). It is argued that telemedicine has much broader social benefits for remote and rural communities, such as indirectly impacting an individual’s economic, environmental, and cultural security (Graham, 2017).

In addition, telemedicine reduces the need for travel, which is of significance to developed as well as developing countries, but for differing reasons; financial benefit in developed countries (Combi et al., 2016; Wootton et al., 2011) and fundamental issues in the developing world (O’Gorman and Hogenbirk, 2016; Okwaraji and Edmond, 2012; Russo et al., 2016). For example people often have to walk, sometimes for days, to get to a decent clinic or hospital. Also, although limited, and not the focus of telemedicine in the developing world at this time, telemedicine can enable rural patients to access in-house monitoring, e.g., for chronic disease management such as heart disease and diabetes (Bashshur et al., 2014; Goodridge and Marciniuk, 2016). Certainly in the USA, telemedicine has earned legislative support because of the alternative option of care for rural patients (Daniel and Sulmasy, 2015). Several States and the Veteran’s Administration now allow telemedicine across state lines without concurrent licensure (Latoya and Gary, 2016) and the American Medical Association guidelines note that a videoconference consultation can be used to establish a physician – patient relationship even without any prior encounter (Farouk, 2016).

Challenges to Telemedicine: Telemedicine and telehealth projects in developing countries face enormous challenges. People are poor and as a result the tax base is low, the burden of disease is high and there are extreme shortages of health professionals (WHO, 2006). Infrastructure e.g. ICT technology and connectivity is generally poor and power supply erratic. There are organizational issues such as lack of human health resources, shortages in medical supplies and drugs, poor referral system, and inadequate transportation; and financial support seldom extends beyond the initial pilot phase of a project. Added to this is lack of government will, limited technical support, absence of legal and ethical guidelines, and local cultural issues (Mars, 2013). Other challenges that might affect telemedicine and telehealth projects in developed countries may include the need for reimbursement to physicians, the high cost of initial investment, acceptance by patients, and incompatible / non-interoperable systems (Emids, 2016). Further, the lack of an international framework for telemedicine is a hindrance for healthcare professionals to work beyond their own border, and transfer of patient files over the Internet is a threat to patient privacy (Eccles, 2012). Some telemedicine solutions also represent an extra workload and a burden to the health workers; that is, the same doctors and nurses who are already over stressed by the volume of patients (Mars, 2013).

Unlike the more traditional mode of healthcare that allows a face-to-face interaction, evolving technologies also alter the patient-doctor relationship which may affect holistic healthcare (Toh et al., 2016).

In developing countries, the healthcare system (referral process and consultation) is frustrating to both patients and healthcare workers (HW), and previous studies have identified factors relating to health personnel, transportation and communication infrastructure, and finance to explain the challenges facing the referral system (Amoah and Phillips, 2017). A recent telehealth economic cost analysis provided evidence of the economic efficiency and benefits associated with telemedicine interventions for rural populations (Yilmaz et al., 2018). This is in line with the findings of (Freed et al., 2018) who questioned the worth of investing in telemedicine, but found in its favour, recommending that organizations consider deployment of telemedicine initiatives and advocated greater awareness of implementation of best practices. Adoption and uptake of technology programs such as telemedicine is complex. However, a framework for non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread and sustainability (NASSS) was developed to address issues of adoption, non-adoption and abandonment of new technologies together with challenges right from demonstration to full integration (Greenhalgh et al., 2017).

Reference

1. AMERICAN TELEMEDICINE ASSOCIATION (ATA). 2018. Telemedicine benefits. Available: http://www.americantelemed.org/main/about/about-telemedicine/telemedicine-benefits
2. AMOAH, P. A. and PHILLIPS, D. R. 2017. Strengthening the referral system through social capital: a qualitative inquiry in Ghana. Healthcare (Basel), 5(4),80
3. ARMAIGNAC, D. L., SAXENA, A., RUBENS, M.,et al.,. 2018. Impact of telemedicine on mortality, length of stay, and cost among patients in progressive care units: experience from a large healthcare system. Crit Care Med, 46, 728-735.
4. BASHSHUR, R. L. & SHANNON, G. W. 2010. History of telemedicine: evolution, context, and transformation. 2009. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.: New Rochelle (NY).
5. BASHSHUR, R. L., SHANNON, G. W., KRUPINSKI, E. & GRIGSBY, J. 2011. The taxonomy of telemedicine. Telemed J E Health, 17, 484-494.
6. BENNETT, A. M., RAPPAPORT, W. & SKINNER, E. 1978. Telehealth Handbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
7. BHATIA, D. 2015. Medical Informatics, Asoke K. Ghosh, PHI learning private limited, rimjhim house, 111, Patparganj industrial estate, Delhi – 110092.
8. CHIRON HEALTH. 2017. What is Telemedicine?. Available: https://chironhealth.com/telemedicine/what-is-telemedicine/.
9. COMBI, C., POZZANI, G. & POZZI, G. 2016. Telemedicine for developing Countries: A survey and some design issues. Appl Clin Inform, 7, 1025-1050.
10. COMBI, C., POZZANI, G. & POZZI, G. 2016. Telemedicine for developing Countries: A survey and some design issues. Appl Clin Inform, 7, 1025-1050.
11. DANIEL, H. & SULMASY, L. 2015. Policy recommendations to guide the use of telemedicine in primary care settings: An American College of Physicians position paper. Ann Intern Med, 163, 787-789.
12. DESHPANDE, A., KHOJA, S., LORCA, J. et al., 2009. Asynchronous telehealth: a scoping review of analytic studies. Open Med, 3, e69-e91.
13. DINESEN, B., NONNECKE, B., LINDERMAN, D., et al., 2016. Personalized telehealth in the future: a global research agenda. J Med Internet Res, 18, e53.
14. DIXON, P., HOLLINGHURST, S., EDWARDS, L.,et al., 2016. Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with depression: evidence from the healthlines randomised controlled trial. BJPsych Open, 2, 262-269.
15. ECCLES, N. 2012. Telemedicine in developing countries: challenges and successes. Global Health Review. Available: https://www.hcs.harvard.edu/hghr/print/spring-2011/telemedicine-developing/
16. EMIDS. 2016. Understanding barriers to telehealth adoption. Emids Experience Partnership [Online]. Available from: http://www.emids.com/understanding-barriers-to-telehealth-adoption/
17. FAROUK, A. 2016. Telemedicine prompts new ethical ground rules for physicians. AMA Wire 2016. Available: https://wire.ama-assn.org/ama-news/telemedicine-prompts-new-ethical-ground-rules-physicians
18. FREED, J., LOWE, C., FLODGREN, G. et al., .2018. Telemedicine: is it really worth it? A perspective from evidence and experience. J Innov Health Inform, 25, 14-18.
19. GOODRIDGE, D. & MARCINIUK, D. 2016. Rural and remote care: overcoming the challenges of distance. Chron Respir Dis, 13, 192-203.
20. GRAHAM, M. 2017. The Broader Benefits:  Telehealth as an instrument to improve human security in remote and northern Canada. Queen’s Policy Review. Public Policy & Canada’s 150.
21. GREENHALGH, T., WHERTON, J., PROCTER, R., et al. 2017. Beyond adoption: a new framework for theorizing and evaluating non adoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. J Med Internet Res, 19, e367.
22. HASSIBIAN, M. R. & HASSIBIAN, S. 2016. Telemedicine acceptance and implementation in developing countries: benefits, categories, and barriers. Razavi Int J Med, 4, e38332.
23. HODGSON, R. L. 2018. The Promise of Telehealth – Part I in a Series Addressing the Role of Telehealth. Available: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-promise-of-telehealth-part-i-in-a-69448/
24. KAUFMAN, D. R., PEVZNER, J., RODRIGUEZ, M.,et al.2009. Understanding workflow in telehealth video visits: observations from the IDEATel project. J Biomed Inform, 42, 581-592.
25. MALHOTRA, S., CHAKRABARTI, S. & SHAH, R. 2013. Telepsychiatry: promise, potential, and challenges. Indian J Psychol Med, 55, 3-11.
26. MARIOS-NIKOLAOS, K. & CHARALAMBOS, B. 2017. Cost-benefit analysis of telemedicine systems/units in Greek remote areas. Pharmacoecon Open, 1, 117-121.
27. MARS, M. & SCOTT, R. E. 2017. Being spontaneous: the future of telehealth implementation? Telemed J E Health, 23, 766-772.
28. MARS, M. 2013. Telemedicine and advances in urban and rural healthcare delivery in Africa. Prog Cardiovasc Dis, 56, 326-335.
29. MISEDA, M. H., WERE, S. O., MURIANKI, C. A., et al. 2017. The implication of the shortage of health workforce specialist on universal health coverage in Kenya. Hum Resour Health, 15, 80.
30. MISEDA, M. H., WERE, S. O., MURIANKI, C. A., et al. 2017. The implication of the shortage of health workforce specialist on universal health coverage in Kenya. Hum Resour Health, 15, 80.
31. O’GORMAN, L. D. & HOGENBIRK, J. C. 2016. Driving distance to telemedicine units in Northern Ontario as a measure of potential access to healthcare. Telemed J E Health, 22, 269-275.
32. OKWARAJI, Y. B. & EDMOND, K. M. 2012. Proximity to health services and child survival in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 2, e001196.
33. PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGANIZATION. 2018. eHealth components [Online]. Available: https://www.paho.org/ict4health/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=80:components&Itemid=0&lang=en.
34. PAPPAS, C. 2015. Asynchronous learning advantages and disadvantages in corporate training. Available: https://elearningindustry.com/asynchronous-learning-advantages-and-disadvantages-in-corporate-training
35. PEREGO, G. B., OLDANI, M., PELLEGRINI, D., et al. 2017. Correlation between pulmonary artery pressure and thoracic impedance: insights from daily monitoring through an implanted device in chronic heart failure. Int J Cardiol, 245, 196-200.
36. POWELL, R. E., HENSTENBURG, J. M., COOPER, G., et al.2017. Patient perceptions of telehealth primary care video visits. Ann Fam Med, 15, 225-229.
37. ROSS, J., STEVENSON, F., LAU, R. & MURRAY, E. 2016. Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update). Implement Sci, 11, 146.
38. RUBIO, N., PARKER, R. A., DROST, E. M., et al., 2017. Home monitoring of breathing rate in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: observational study of feasibility, acceptability, and change after exacerbation. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis, 12, 1221-1231.
39. THOMAS, C. L., MAN, M. S., O’CATHAIN, A., et al. 2014. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention to support the management of long-term conditions: study protocol for two linked randomized controlled trials. Trials, 15, 36.
40. TOH, N., PAWLOVICH, J. & GRZYBOWSKI, S. 2016. Telehealth and patient-doctor relationships in rural and remote communities. Can Fam Physician, 62, 961-963.
41. WHITTEN, P., HOLTZ, B. & LAPLANTE, C. 2010. Telemedicine: what have we learned? Appl Clin Inform, 1, 132-141.
42. WHO. 2006. The World Health Report. The World Health Report 2006 – working together for health. Available: http://www.who.int/whr/2006/en/.
43. WHO. 2010. Telemedicine: opportunities and developments in member states: report on the second global survey on eHealth 2009. Healthc Inform Res, 18 153-155.
44. WHO. 2018. eHealth. Available: http://www.who.int/ehealth/about/en/ [Accessed 12 July 2018].
45. WOOTTON, R., BAHAADINBEIGY, K. & HAILEY, D.2011. Estimating travel reduction associated with the use of telemedicine by patients and healthcare professionals: proposal for quantitative synthesis in a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res, 11, 185-185.
46. YILMAZ, S. K., HORN, B. P., FORE, C. & BONHAM, C. A. 2018. An economic cost analysis of an expanding, multi-state behavioural telehealth intervention. J Telemed Telecare, 1357633×18774181.

Article by Dr. Vincent Micheal Kibera, PhD.
Health Informatician,
Makerere University School of Public Health.
https://sph.mak.ac.ug/

e-Learning and COVID-19

The term e-learning which is believed to have originated in the 1980s with the inception of online learning is generally defined as the delivery of instruction on a digital device such as computer or mobile device that is intended to support learning either online or offline ¹.

The use of e-learning for instruction is arguably as effective as or more effective than face to face learning. In blended learning as a way of supplementing the traditional teaching methods, eLearning can increase learner engagement, is learner-focused, is easily updated as new knowledge emerges, and increases access through the removal of geographic barriers².

Further still, there is an increase in number of free and open-source e-learning platforms such as MOODLE and Open edX that can be used to deliver learning electronically. Such platforms are not only highly customizable and scalable supporting large numbers of learners, but also provide functionalities like live classes (Zoom plugin integrations), quizzes, and chats, among others making learning very interactive and enjoyable.

In this ever-changing world, it has become nearly impossible to deliver or receive formal education without the use of advanced technologies, hence the increased application of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in the delivery of education. Covering a wide range of technologies for gathering, storing, retrieving, processing, analyzing, and transmitting or presenting information, ICTs are indeed vital in the delivery of education2. Subsequently, there is a steady rise in investment by various entities including governments, education institutions, and individuals in these ICTs in order to keep up with the current trends.

In Low- and middle-income countries, one rapidly growing aspect of e-learning is mobile learning which focuses on the use of mobile devices to aid learning. This steady rise in the use of mobile technologies has been realized due to the increasingly falling prices of mobile devices leading to increased ownership.

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of e-learning has further been emphasized. Many entities, including governments, agencies, and institutions of learning have resorted to e-learning to enable continuity of learning for their staff and students from the safety of their homes where they are not exposed to the virus. There has also been an increase in free online courses from various platforms such as Coursera, Udemy and audacity. In April 2020, UNICEF and Microsoft Corp announced the expansion of a global learning platform to help children and youth affected by COVID-19 continue their education at home.

The Learning Passport which started as a partnership between UNICEF, Microsoft and the University of Cambridge and its departments Cambridge University Press and Cambridge Assessment, designed to provide education for displaced and refugee children through a digital remote learning platform, was expanded to facilitate country-level curriculum for children and youth whose schools have been forced to close due to COVID-19³. In Argentina, the Ministry of Education launched Educ.ar an educational portal aimed at providing curated digital resources for teachers, administrators, students, and families. The program “Seguimos Educando”, developed by the Ministry of Education and the Secretariat of Media and Public Communication, began broadcasting educational content from April 1, 2020, airing 14 hours a day of television content and 7 hours a day of radio content specially produced for students as a result of school closures⁴.

In June 2020, the Ugandan Ministry of Health launched the MOH Uganda Capacity Building mobile application supported by the Community Health Academy- Last Mile Health in collaboration with Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Uganda Chartered HealthNet. This is a health worker learning/training app aimed at closing the gap in capacity building caused by the COVID-19 social distancing guidelines that prohibit the traditional capacity building efforts5. e-learning is therefore poised to play a critical role in the advancement of health education in the future or post COVID as the saying goes. The sudden global shift in learning away from traditional face to face due to the pandemic leaves a question of whether electronic learning will persist post COVID and how this is likely to impact learning world-wide.

REFERENCES

1.        Trump A, Carr C. Assessing the Feasibility of Utilizing eLearning Content in Midwifery Schools in Ghana. 2014.

2.        Gyambrah M. E-Learning Technologies and Its Application in Higher Education: A Descriptive Comparison of Germany, United Kingdom and United States. Policy. 2007. http://edoc.ub.uni-muenchen.de/archive/00007358/.

3.        UNICEF and Microsoft launch global learning platform to help address COVID-19 education crisis. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/unicef-and-microsoft-launch-global-learning-platform-help-address-covid-19-education. Accessed July 2, 2020.

4.        How countries are using edtech (including online learning, radio, television, texting) to support access to remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/edutech/brief/how-countries-are-using-edtech-to-support-remote-learning-during-the-covid-19-pandemic. Accessed July 2, 2020.

5.        MOH Uganda Capacity Building App – Apps on Google Play. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ug.go.health.mobile.covid19. Accessed July 2, 2020.

Article by: Balirwa Priscillah,
Health Informatician,
Living Goods Uganda.
https://livinggoods.org/

Biometrics in Healthcare

The term biometrics is always associated to fingerprint but there is actually more to it, biometrics is a term related to our human body itself, whereby biometrics are defined as the physical or behavioral human characteristics that can be used to digitally identify an individual for numerous purposes that include but not limited to: (a) Granting access (b) Identity confirmation and (c) record matching. Examples of biometric techniques include; Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), fingerprints, facial, voice, iris, palm, and vein patterns among others.

In this article, we shall focus more on fingerprint biometrics and its application in healthcare and underscore why healthcare practitioners, managers, and enthusiasts should be thinking of adopting biometrics for use in their settings. According to recogtech a security solutions company, fingerprint biometrics are arguably the most used and best-known biometrics. However, facial and iris recognition are steadily gaining tract as years go by. The fundamental reasons as to why fingerprint biometrics stands out in terms of popularity are related to the fact that: (a) Their ease use (b) relatively affordable in terms of software and hardware, i.e. Fingerprint scanners are all over the market unlike DNA profiling machines and (c) Fingerprints don’t consume a lot of computing resources when it comes to storage and processing hence efficient. It should, however, be noted that as the number of fingerprints stored in the database increases, the more resources you will need, the good news is, the increment in resource consumption is not exponential hence manageable even in the long run.  

As a matter of fact, fingerprinting as a record matching and identification methodology is widely known and used. Nonetheless, its penetration and usage, particularly in the healthcare industry, is still on the low. This is usually attributed to the intricacies in the healthcare workflow and other care processes that make it’s implementation a little bit tricky. Unlike other sectors like banking, Immigration, and security where the usage and implementation of biometrics is pretty straight forward, in healthcare the terrain assumes a different and tricky trajectory. Patient privacy and confidentiality concerns have always been cited as major issues to the implementation of this technology in the sector. Furthermore, ethical concerns surrounding the appropriate use of biometrics have also been of great concern, especially in resource-poor settings where data protection acts may not be comprehensive enough to protect patients as we push for biometrics integration in the healthcare industry. This is also true for advanced economies and that’s why states like Illinois in the USA had to pass an additional privacyact on top of HIPAA to cater for biometric implementations in their jurisdiction. Therefore addressing privacy and ethical concerns is crucial as we push for this technology in the healthcare industry. Other challenges to the implementation of biometrics include; (a) Sometimes you might require more than one finger to improve accuracy especially in populations where people’s palms are affected by the nature of their work, e.g. ironsmith workers usually have worn out palms; (b) if security is not ensured then client’s fingerprints may be compromised and used for the wrong reasons, and (c) people’s perception of biometrics being linked to crime scene investigations could also pause as a challenge to the implementation and acceptance of the technology.

So why biometrics in healthcare?

To ensure patient safety, the right care must be administered to the right patient. This, therefore, calls for proper and meticulous patient identification before administering care. Patient identification sometimes referred to as patient matching is the ability to match a patient to their record either situated in an Electronic Medical Records System (EMRs) or another medium such as a patient card. Failure to correctly match patients before care leads to errors that sometimes even lead to death in the worst-case scenario.

A report published in 2016 indicated that in the United States alone, about 195,000 deaths occur each year because of medical errors, with 10 of 17 being the result of identity errors. Preventing patient identification errors has been and still is an area of significant research.

While much progress has been made in this area, there is still more work and effort needed, patient identification errors can occur in every healthcare setting, during the encounter especially if due diligence is not done. Nonetheless, these errors are preventable, and to achieve this, biometrics could just be the answer, healthcare entities looking forward to providing the most secure and uniquely identifiable end-user authentication while providing the best inpatient and staff experience are considering Biometrics for the solution.

Despite the intricacies in the health settings workflow and not forgetting the challenges to the implementation of biometrics mentioned earlier, fingerprint biometrics matching and identification is actually feasible and implementable in these settings. Since people are used to fingerprinting in other sectors like banking and aviation, chances are high that this technology will be embraced and acceptable to the users (patients) in this domain if adopted and of course, keeping user concerns like patient privacy, confidentiality, and others in check.

Patients often lose or misplace their patient cards, which usually contain patient identification information and other pertinent details, in the event that the card lost as is always the case, patient identification becomes cumbersome, time-consuming and counterproductive to the care process. However, if fingerprints are used, then you are sure the patient will be identified in real-time and this will significantly reduce the time of the encounter which in the end improves efficiency.

References

https://www.csoonline.com/article/3339565/what-is-biometrics-and-why-collecting-biometric-data-is-risky.html

https://www.recogtech.com/en/knowledge-base/5-common-biometric-techniques-compared#:~:text=Fingerprint%20recognition%20and%20iris%20scanning,are%20also%20gaining%20in%20popularity.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11287462.2020.1773063

http://www.biometricsdirect.com/Biometrics/laws/HIPAA.htm

Article by: Noah k. Jaafa,
HELINA Association.