Confidentiality in medicine: how far should doctors prioritise the confidentiality of the individual they are treating?

Peterson, Jennifer

doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2018-136038

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The two remaining blocks were made up of questions directed towards evaluating the frequency (always, often, sometimes, seldom, or never) with which specific action requirements related to the students were performed when attending a patient (Qno. [3][4][5][6][7][8] and regarding the guarantees in accessing and managing their CH both on paper and in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) (Q-no. 9-14).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Without an expectation of privacy, patients might not disclose important information or may avoid seeking care, fearing a loss of employment or stigmatization [ 2 ]. The rights to privacy and the protection of health data deserve particular respect in the healthcare environment [ 3 ]. This duty primarily falls on the healthcare professional in charge of attending the patient, but we cannot obviate the fundamental role of universities and healthcare institutions in training future professionals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of undergraduate medical students training in respect for patient confidentiality

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Encouraging professional integrity is vital for providing a standard of excellence in quality medical care and education and in promoting a culture of respect and responsibility. The primary objective of this work consisted of studying the relationship of medical students to the right to patient privacy in Spain, specifically by analysing the conditions for accessing patient clinical histories (CHs). Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted based on a questionnaire sent by e-mail to final-year students at 41 Spanish universities. It had 14 multiple choice and closed questions framed in 3 large blocks. The first question addressed basic general knowledge issues on the right to privacy and the obligation for confidentiality. The two remaining blocks were made up of questions directed towards evaluating the frequency with which certain requirements and action steps related to students attending patients were performed and regarding the guarantees associated with accessing and handling patient CHs both on paper and in the Electronic Medical Record. Results A total of 245 valid replies were considered. A total of 67.8 % of participants were women, with an average age of 24.05 ± 3.49 years. Up to 90.6 % were aware that confidentiality affected the data in CHs, although 43.3 % possessed non-anonymized photocopies of patient clinical reports outside the healthcare context, and only 49.8 % of the students were always adequately identified. A total of 59.2 % accessed patient CHs on some occasions by using passwords belonging to healthcare professionals, 77.2 % of them did not have the patients’ express consent, and 71.9 % accessed a CH that was not anonymised. Conclusions The role of healthcare institutions and universities is considered to be fundamental in implementing educational measures regarding the risks and ethical and legal problems arising from the use of CHs among professionals and students. A thorough study of medical ethics is needed through the analysis of clinical cases and direct exposure to situations in which the patient’s confidentiality is questioned.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of undergraduate medical students training in respect for patient confidentiality

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The principal duty of healthcare professionals is to provide appropriate care to the person who sought their help and do all they can to benefit the patient (in each situation), to promote their patient’s autonomy and to do no harm. Moreover, healthcare professionals have a confidential (physician–patient) relationship with probands in which all information shared or discussed is protected by the duty of medical confidentiality [ 16 ]. In most countries, healthcare professionals do not owe substantial duties to individuals who did not seek their help, and it is therefore not their primary duty to (also) serve the health interests of their patient’s relatives [ 17 ].…”

Section: Main Bodymentioning

confidence: 99%

A genetic researcher’s devil’s dilemma: Warn relatives about their genetic risk or respect confidentiality agreements with research participants?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background With advances in sequencing technologies, increasing numbers of people are being informed about a genetic disease identified in their family. In current practice, probands (the first person in a family in whom a genetic predisposition is identified) are asked to inform at-risk relatives about the diagnosis. However, previous research has shown that relatives are sometimes not informed due to barriers such as family conflicts. Research on family communication in genetic diseases aims to explore the difficulties encountered in informing relatives and to identify ways to support probands in this. Main body Research on family communication may also reveal that participants did not inform their relatives about the risk of a serious genetic condition, even when preventive and treatment options are available. Researchers may then face a dilemma: Do they need to warn at-risk relatives about the finding? Or do they keep silent due to prior confidentiality agreements with study participants? Conclusions We believe that the absolute confidence promised to research participants outweighs the interests of their relatives, even though it can be claimed that relatives at risk of a genetic disease do, in principle, have a right to know information collected about their health. Not respecting confidentiality agreements could cause distrust between researchers and research participants and possibly harm the relationship between probands and relatives. Relatives' health interests can still be taken into account without jeopardizing participant trust, by considering alternative scenarios, including sharing general study findings on the barriers participants experience with their healthcare professionals and by offering participants psychosocial support for family communication.

show abstract

“…The right to intimacy and the protection of health data deserve particular respect in the healthcare environment [1]. This duty mainly falls on the healthcare professional in charge of attending the patient, but we cannot obviate the fundamental role carried out by the Universities and healthcare institutions in training future professionals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Undegraduate Medical Students Training in Respect for Patient Confidentiality

Beltrán-Aroca

Ruiz-Montero

Labella

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Encouraging professional integrity is vital in providing a standard of excellence in the quality of medical care and education, promoting a culture of respect and responsibility. The main objective of this work consisted of studying the relationship of medical students with the right to intimacy of patients in Spain, specifically analysing the conditions of accessing patients’ Clinical History (CH).Methods: A questionnaire was sent by e-mail to final-year students at 41 Spanish universities. It had 14 multiple choice and closed questions framed in 3 large blocks. The first one addressed basic general knowledge issues on the right to intimacy and the obligation of confidentiality. The two remaining blocks were made up of questions directed towards evaluating the frequency with which certain requirements and steps of action related to the students in attending the patient were performed, and regarding the guarantees in accessing and handling their CH both on paper and in the Electronic Medical Record.Results: A total of 245 valid replies was considered. 67.8% of participants were women, with an average age of 24.05±3.49 years. Up to 90.6% were aware that confidentiality affected the data in CHs, although 43.3% possessed non-anonymized photocopies of patients’ clinical reports outside healthcare context, and only 49.8% of the students were always adequately identified. 59.2% accessed patients’ CHs on some occasions by using passwords of healthcare professionals and 77.2% of them did not have patients’ express consent and 71.9% accessed a CH that was not anonymised.Conclusions: The role of healthcare institutions and universities is considered to be fundamental in implementing educational measures regarding the risks and ethical and legal problems arising from the use of CHs among professionals and students. A profound study of medical ethics is needed through the analysis of clinical cases, and direct exposure to situations in which the patient’s confidentiality is questioned.

show abstract

Confidentiality in medicine: how far should doctors prioritise the confidentiality of the individual they are treating?

Cited by 11 publications

References 6 publications

The role of undergraduate medical students training in respect for patient confidentiality

The role of undergraduate medical students training in respect for patient confidentiality

A genetic researcher’s devil’s dilemma: Warn relatives about their genetic risk or respect confidentiality agreements with research participants?

The Role of Undegraduate Medical Students Training in Respect for Patient Confidentiality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About