Control over patient data sharing

As long as the patient details are registered with a hospital or general practitioner, it is customary for this organisation to choose with whom this information is shared. Sometimes this is done in consultation or with the patient’s consent, but often it is not. In some cases, fax and post are abolished and information is now sent by e-mail. Where this is done via a secure e-mail solution, patients and employees can count on great satisfaction. Because less mail is used, this also contributes a little to a better environment (1). In sommige gevallen worden de fax en de post afgeschaft en wordt de informatie voortaan per e-mail gestuurd. Daar waar dit via een beveiligde e-mailoplossing gebeurd, kan dit bij patiënten en medewerkers rekenen op grote tevredenheid. Omdat er minder post wordt gebruikt, draagt dit ook een beetje bij aan een beter milieu (1).

The moment the data enters a database with a more shared character, the question is who actually owns that data. It’s obvious to say that this is the patient himself. There are a few problems with that. First of all, a practitioner does not always want a patient to be able to see all the data, because he or she is often unable to interpret some of the data correctly. Patients don’t always want to know everything. In addition, it turns out that it is very difficult for patients to organise the authorisations properly and to indicate who, when, for how long, and which data may be accessed. For a part of the patients it is difficult, for a part they appear not to do so simply because of ignorance or laxity. Sharing the data is then not possible. Patients react very differently to gaining control. On average they score a 0. This is slightly more positive for healthcare workers (1).