A national survey of physicians regarding protection of patient privacy in China

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Zhongzhou Xiao , Wei Zhai , Xinwei Peng , Yun Zhong , Shuqing Luo , Ruiyao Chen , Lu Lu , Yijue Zhang , Jie Xu
{"title":"A national survey of physicians regarding protection of patient privacy in China","authors":"Zhongzhou Xiao ,&nbsp;Wei Zhai ,&nbsp;Xinwei Peng ,&nbsp;Yun Zhong ,&nbsp;Shuqing Luo ,&nbsp;Ruiyao Chen ,&nbsp;Lu Lu ,&nbsp;Yijue Zhang ,&nbsp;Jie Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3><strong>Objectives</strong></h3><p>The significance of safeguarding patient privacy at a population level within public medical institutions remains insufficiently acknowledged despite the potential to enhance the protection awareness of physicians and of hospital management in clinical practice. We herein devised a survey to investigate the current state of patient privacy breaches in China and to ascertain its underlying rationales.</p></div><div><h3><strong>Methods</strong></h3><p><span>We conducted a comprehensive nationwide survey of 928 physicians in seven geographic regions of China through convenience and snowball sampling, enrolled physicians defined in the Chinese Health Statistics Yearbook, and measured the incidence of medical data breaches. Physicians’ perceptions and behaviors with respect to patient privacy protection and their attitudes toward hospital management were accessed through descriptive statistics. Multiple </span>logistic regression analysis was also conducted with different adjustments of covariates for each model.</p></div><div><h3><strong>Results</strong></h3><p>Of the 937 respondents, 928 physicians were eligible and validated for the analysis. We estimated that 52.2 % (95 %CI, 48.9–55.4) of the physicians reported that they had disclosed their patients’ privacy. Master's (OR, 0.63 [95 %CI, 0.43–0.92]) and Ph.D. (OR, 0.59 [95 %CI, 0.35–1.00]) educational levels, scores on the understanding of patient privacy protection (OR, 0.89 [95 %CI, 0.80–0.99]), the presence of colleagues who had experienced data disclosure (OR, 7.00 [95 %CI, 5.02–9.77]), full-time department supervision (OR, 1.60 [95 %CI, 1.02–2.53]) and corresponding regulations (OR, 0.56 [95 %CI, 0.33–0.97]) for patient privacy protection in the hospital, restricted external equipment for computers (OR, 1.76 [95 %CI, 1.10–2.83]), and access to medical records (OR, 0.62 [95 %CI, 0.41–0.94]) were all associated with privacy breaches by physicians.</p></div><div><h3><strong>Conclusions</strong></h3><p>In general, patient privacy research and awareness of patient privacy protection are relatively deficient in China, with a remarkably high occurrence of disclosure. We posit that the identification of the factors underlying our results will provide evidence for appropriate hospital management, and that these factors may then be generalizable to other clinical settings.</p></div><div><h3><strong>Public interest summary</strong></h3><p>Patient privacy breaches seem to be rarely mentioned and addressed regardless of the country, potentially due to its high sensitivity, while this is significant in clinical practice. In this study, we meant to find out the answers to the questions, “What is the situation of privacy disclosure in China public medical institutions?”, “Why does it happen?”, and “Is patient privacy protected enough? If not, how can we do better?”. Through conducting a survey among physicians, their answers were collected for further analysis. Our results appear to provide guidance for physicians on patient privacy protection and support hospital and information management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000990","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The significance of safeguarding patient privacy at a population level within public medical institutions remains insufficiently acknowledged despite the potential to enhance the protection awareness of physicians and of hospital management in clinical practice. We herein devised a survey to investigate the current state of patient privacy breaches in China and to ascertain its underlying rationales.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive nationwide survey of 928 physicians in seven geographic regions of China through convenience and snowball sampling, enrolled physicians defined in the Chinese Health Statistics Yearbook, and measured the incidence of medical data breaches. Physicians’ perceptions and behaviors with respect to patient privacy protection and their attitudes toward hospital management were accessed through descriptive statistics. Multiple logistic regression analysis was also conducted with different adjustments of covariates for each model.

Results

Of the 937 respondents, 928 physicians were eligible and validated for the analysis. We estimated that 52.2 % (95 %CI, 48.9–55.4) of the physicians reported that they had disclosed their patients’ privacy. Master's (OR, 0.63 [95 %CI, 0.43–0.92]) and Ph.D. (OR, 0.59 [95 %CI, 0.35–1.00]) educational levels, scores on the understanding of patient privacy protection (OR, 0.89 [95 %CI, 0.80–0.99]), the presence of colleagues who had experienced data disclosure (OR, 7.00 [95 %CI, 5.02–9.77]), full-time department supervision (OR, 1.60 [95 %CI, 1.02–2.53]) and corresponding regulations (OR, 0.56 [95 %CI, 0.33–0.97]) for patient privacy protection in the hospital, restricted external equipment for computers (OR, 1.76 [95 %CI, 1.10–2.83]), and access to medical records (OR, 0.62 [95 %CI, 0.41–0.94]) were all associated with privacy breaches by physicians.

Conclusions

In general, patient privacy research and awareness of patient privacy protection are relatively deficient in China, with a remarkably high occurrence of disclosure. We posit that the identification of the factors underlying our results will provide evidence for appropriate hospital management, and that these factors may then be generalizable to other clinical settings.

Public interest summary

Patient privacy breaches seem to be rarely mentioned and addressed regardless of the country, potentially due to its high sensitivity, while this is significant in clinical practice. In this study, we meant to find out the answers to the questions, “What is the situation of privacy disclosure in China public medical institutions?”, “Why does it happen?”, and “Is patient privacy protected enough? If not, how can we do better?”. Through conducting a survey among physicians, their answers were collected for further analysis. Our results appear to provide guidance for physicians on patient privacy protection and support hospital and information management.

一项关于中国医生对患者隐私保护的全国性调查
目的尽管在临床实践中有可能提高医生和医院管理人员的保护意识,但在公共医疗机构中保护患者隐私的重要性仍未得到充分认识。我们在此设计了一项调查,以调查中国患者隐私泄露的现状,并确定其潜在的理由。方法采用便利抽样和滚雪球抽样的方法,对全国7个地理区域的928名医生进行全面调查,纳入《中国卫生统计年鉴》中定义的医生,并测量医疗数据泄露的发生率。通过描述性统计了解医生对患者隐私保护的认知和行为,以及他们对医院管理的态度。对每个模型进行不同协变量调整的多元logistic回归分析。结果937名应答者中,928名医生符合分析条件。我们估计有52.2% (95% CI, 48.9-55.4)的医生报告说他们泄露了病人的隐私。硕士(OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.43-0.92])和博士(OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35-1.00])学历水平,对患者隐私保护的理解得分(OR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.80-0.99]),是否有经历过数据泄露的同事在场(OR, 7.00 [95% CI, 5.02-9.77]),是否有专职科室监督(OR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.02-2.53])和相应的医院患者隐私保护规定(OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.33-0.97]);限制计算机外部设备(OR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.10-2.83])和获取医疗记录(OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.41-0.94])都与医生侵犯隐私有关。结论总体而言,中国的患者隐私研究和患者隐私保护意识相对不足,患者隐私泄露的发生率很高。我们认为,确定我们的结果背后的因素将为适当的医院管理提供证据,并且这些因素可以推广到其他临床环境。无论在哪个国家,侵犯患者隐私似乎很少被提及和解决,可能是由于其高度敏感性,而这在临床实践中很重要。在本研究中,我们试图找出“中国公立医疗机构的隐私披露情况如何?”、“为什么会这样?”,以及“病人隐私是否得到了足够的保护?”如果不能,我们怎样才能做得更好?”通过对医生进行调查,收集他们的回答以作进一步分析。我们的研究结果似乎为医生在患者隐私保护和支持医院和信息管理方面提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Policy and Technology
Health Policy and Technology Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
88 days
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments. HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology. Topics covered by HPT will include: - Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems - Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches - National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives - Cross-border eHealth including health tourism - The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare - Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies - Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies - Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making - Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in) - Regulation and health economics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信