By 2018, 81.7 million users will own a wearable fitness device, according to eMarketer. And while consumers dabble in the cool features and sleek user interface of their wearables, healthcare providers continue to ask one important question: Does this tsunami of patient-generated data ultimately belong in the medical record?
The answer will be largely dictated by patients themselves, many of whom have already begun to express a strong desire to share wearable data with their healthcare providers, said Harry Rhodes, director of HIM practice excellence at the American Health Information Management Association.
Yet, there are plenty of other data-related issues to address. Rhodes provided these four questions that every healthcare provider should consider:
1. Who owns the data? Read the fine print. It’s certainly not the provider or the consumer, said Rhodes. Wearable vendors not only own the data they collect, but they’re also free to sell that data—mostly to marketing research firms, he added. Even after consumers consent to use the wearable, healthcare providers must be prepared to provide education to consumers regarding how their data could be used, sold and even re-identified.
2. Who keeps the data private and secure? Unless the healthcare provider—a covered entity under HIPAA—supplies the wearable device to the patient, that provider is technically not obligated to protect that data, according to Rhodes. Neither is the wearable vendor—typically a non-covered entity.
“Consumers assume that there is a watchdog, and that’s just not the case,” said Rhodes. Again, this is an opportunity for consumer education.
A Deep-dive Into Specialty Pharma
A specialty drug is a class of prescription medications used to treat complex, chronic or rare medical conditions. Although this classification was originally intended to define the treatment of rare, also termed “orphan” diseases, affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the US, more recently, specialty drugs have emerged as the cornerstone of treatment for chronic and complex diseases such as cancer, autoimmune conditions, diabetes, hepatitis C, and HIV/AIDS.
An education strategy is something to consider, particularly given the fact that ransomware against medical devices and wearables is the No. 1 healthcare cybersecurity threat in 2016, according to a Forrester Research report.
3. Can healthcare providers rely on the data? Just how accurate is it, and will providers be liable for reviewing it? If so, will they at least be able to distinguish between patient-generated data and other types of information data in the electronic health record?
4. What’s the cost of data integration? “Right now, it’s very much a proprietary world,” said Rhodes. Wearables and EHRs don’t share the same operating systems, thus requiring the building of expensive interfaces. Health Level Seven International and various other groups currently working to develop standards for mobile device interoperability, but it could be years before these standards are finalized, Rhodes said.
Some EHR vendors aren’t waiting for interoperability standards. For example, eClinicalWorks, an ambulatory EHR vendor, can now integrate fitness trackers and other wearables data into its patient portal.
As consumers continue to obsess over data collection related to their personal health experiences, many will ultimately want to share this data with those who can help them interpret it—healthcare providers. Will providers be willing and ready? That remains to be seen.
Image: Infopik
