Modifying without a trace: general audit guidelines are inadequate for open-source electronic health record audit mechanisms

J. King, Benjamin H. Smith, L. Williams
{"title":"Modifying without a trace: general audit guidelines are inadequate for open-source electronic health record audit mechanisms","authors":"J. King, Benjamin H. Smith, L. Williams","doi":"10.1145/2110363.2110399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Without adequate audit mechanisms, electronic health record (EHR) systems remain vulnerable to undetected misuse. Users could modify or delete protected health information without these actions being traceable. The objective of this paper is to assess electronic health record audit mechanisms to determine the current degree of auditing for non-repudiation and to assess whether general audit guidelines adequately address non-repudiation. We derived 16 general auditable event types that affect non-repudiation based upon four publications. We qualitatively assess three open-source EHR systems to determine if the systems log these 16 event types. We find that the systems log an average of 12.5% of these event types. We also generated 58 black-box test cases based on specific auditable events derived from Certification Commission for Health Information Technology criteria. We find that only 4.02% of these tests pass. Additionally, 20% of tests fail in all three EHR systems. As a result, actions including the modification of patient demographics and assignment of user privileges can be executed without a trace of the user performing the action. The ambiguous nature of general auditable events may explain the inadequacy of auditing for non-repudiation. EHR system developers should focus on specific auditable events for managing protected health information instead of general events derived from guidelines.","PeriodicalId":90523,"journal":{"name":"IHI ... : proceedings of the ... ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium. ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium","volume":"5 1","pages":"305-314"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"38","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IHI ... : proceedings of the ... ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium. ACM SIGHIT International Health Informatics Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2110363.2110399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

Abstract

Without adequate audit mechanisms, electronic health record (EHR) systems remain vulnerable to undetected misuse. Users could modify or delete protected health information without these actions being traceable. The objective of this paper is to assess electronic health record audit mechanisms to determine the current degree of auditing for non-repudiation and to assess whether general audit guidelines adequately address non-repudiation. We derived 16 general auditable event types that affect non-repudiation based upon four publications. We qualitatively assess three open-source EHR systems to determine if the systems log these 16 event types. We find that the systems log an average of 12.5% of these event types. We also generated 58 black-box test cases based on specific auditable events derived from Certification Commission for Health Information Technology criteria. We find that only 4.02% of these tests pass. Additionally, 20% of tests fail in all three EHR systems. As a result, actions including the modification of patient demographics and assignment of user privileges can be executed without a trace of the user performing the action. The ambiguous nature of general auditable events may explain the inadequacy of auditing for non-repudiation. EHR system developers should focus on specific auditable events for managing protected health information instead of general events derived from guidelines.
修改不留痕迹:一般审计准则不适合开源电子健康记录审计机制
如果没有适当的审计机制,电子健康记录(EHR)系统仍然容易受到未被发现的滥用。用户可以修改或删除受保护的运行状况信息,而无需跟踪这些操作。本文的目的是评估电子健康记录审计机制,以确定不可否认性审计的当前程度,并评估一般审计指南是否充分解决不可否认性问题。我们基于四种发布得出了16种影响不可抵赖性的一般可审计事件类型。我们定性地评估了三个开源EHR系统,以确定这些系统是否记录了这16种事件类型。我们发现系统平均记录了这些事件类型的12.5%。我们还基于来自卫生信息技术认证委员会标准的特定可审计事件生成了58个黑盒测试用例。我们发现只有4.02%的测试通过。此外,在所有三个EHR系统中,20%的测试失败。因此,可以在不跟踪用户执行操作的情况下执行包括修改患者人口统计信息和分配用户权限在内的操作。一般可审计事件的模糊性可以解释不可抵赖性审计的不足。EHR系统开发人员应该关注管理受保护健康信息的特定可审计事件,而不是源自指南的一般事件。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书