Clinical, Organizational and Regulatory, and Ethical and Social (CORES) Issues and Recommendations on Blockchain Deployment for Healthcare: Evidence from Experts.

Blockchain in healthcare today Pub Date : 2022-03-14 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.30953/bhty.v5.199
John Robert Bautista, Muhammad Usman, Daniel Toshio Harrell, Eric T Meyer, Anjum Khurshid
{"title":"Clinical, Organizational and Regulatory, and Ethical and Social (CORES) Issues and Recommendations on Blockchain Deployment for Healthcare: Evidence from Experts.","authors":"John Robert Bautista, Muhammad Usman, Daniel Toshio Harrell, Eric T Meyer, Anjum Khurshid","doi":"10.30953/bhty.v5.199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>While existing research by our team has demonstrated the feasibility of building a decentralized identity management application (\"MediLinker\") for health information, there are implementation issues related to testing such blockchain-based health applications in real-world clinical settings. In this study, we identified clinical, organizational and regulatory, and ethical and social (CORES) issues, including recommendations, associated with deploying MediLinker, and blockchain in general, for clinical testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CORES issues and recommendations were identified through a focus group with 11 academic, industry, and government experts on March 26, 2021. They were grouped according to their expertise: clinical care (<i>n</i> = 4), organizational and regulatory concerns (<i>n</i> = 4), and ethical and social issues (<i>n</i> = 3). The focus group was conducted via Zoom in which experts were briefed about the study aims, formed into breakout groups to identify key issues based on their group's expertise, and reconvened to share identified issues with other groups and to discuss potential recommendations to address such issues. The focus group was video recorded and transcribed. The resulting transcriptions and meeting notes were imported to MAXQDA 2018 for thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinical experts identified issues that concern the clinical system, clinical administrators, clinicians, and patients. Organizational and regulatory experts emphasized issues on accountability, compliance, and legal safeguards. Ethics and social-context experts raised issues on trust, transparency, digital divide, and health-related digital autonomy. Accordingly, experts proposed six recommendations that could address most of the identified issues: (1) design interfaces based on patient preferences, (2) ensure testing with diverse populations, (3) ensure compliance with existing policies, (4) present potential positive outcomes to top management, (5) maintain clinical workflow, and (6) increase the public's awareness of blockchain.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study identified a myriad of CORES issues associated with deploying MediLinker in clinical settings. Moreover, the study also uncovered several recommendations that could address such issues. The findings raise awareness on CORES issues that should be considered when designing, developing, and deploying blockchain for healthcare. Further, the findings provide additional insights into the development of MediLinker from a prototype to a minimum viable product for clinical testing. Future studies can use CORES as a socio-technical model to identify issues and recommendations associated with deploying health information technologies in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":72422,"journal":{"name":"Blockchain in healthcare today","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/58/95/BHTY-5-199.PMC9907415.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blockchain in healthcare today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30953/bhty.v5.199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: While existing research by our team has demonstrated the feasibility of building a decentralized identity management application ("MediLinker") for health information, there are implementation issues related to testing such blockchain-based health applications in real-world clinical settings. In this study, we identified clinical, organizational and regulatory, and ethical and social (CORES) issues, including recommendations, associated with deploying MediLinker, and blockchain in general, for clinical testing.

Methods: CORES issues and recommendations were identified through a focus group with 11 academic, industry, and government experts on March 26, 2021. They were grouped according to their expertise: clinical care (n = 4), organizational and regulatory concerns (n = 4), and ethical and social issues (n = 3). The focus group was conducted via Zoom in which experts were briefed about the study aims, formed into breakout groups to identify key issues based on their group's expertise, and reconvened to share identified issues with other groups and to discuss potential recommendations to address such issues. The focus group was video recorded and transcribed. The resulting transcriptions and meeting notes were imported to MAXQDA 2018 for thematic analysis.

Results: Clinical experts identified issues that concern the clinical system, clinical administrators, clinicians, and patients. Organizational and regulatory experts emphasized issues on accountability, compliance, and legal safeguards. Ethics and social-context experts raised issues on trust, transparency, digital divide, and health-related digital autonomy. Accordingly, experts proposed six recommendations that could address most of the identified issues: (1) design interfaces based on patient preferences, (2) ensure testing with diverse populations, (3) ensure compliance with existing policies, (4) present potential positive outcomes to top management, (5) maintain clinical workflow, and (6) increase the public's awareness of blockchain.

Conclusions: This study identified a myriad of CORES issues associated with deploying MediLinker in clinical settings. Moreover, the study also uncovered several recommendations that could address such issues. The findings raise awareness on CORES issues that should be considered when designing, developing, and deploying blockchain for healthcare. Further, the findings provide additional insights into the development of MediLinker from a prototype to a minimum viable product for clinical testing. Future studies can use CORES as a socio-technical model to identify issues and recommendations associated with deploying health information technologies in clinical settings.

Abstract Image

关于医疗保健区块链部署的临床、组织和监管以及伦理和社会(CORES)问题和建议:专家提供的证据。
目标:虽然我们团队的现有研究已经证明了为健康信息构建去中心化身份管理应用程序("MediLinker")的可行性,但在现实世界的临床环境中测试此类基于区块链的健康应用程序还存在实施问题。在本研究中,我们确定了与部署 MediLinker 和一般区块链进行临床测试相关的临床、组织和监管以及伦理和社会(CORES)问题,包括建议:2021 年 3 月 26 日,11 位学术界、业界和政府专家通过焦点小组确定了 CORES 问题和建议。他们根据各自的专长进行了分组:临床护理(4 人)、组织和监管问题(4 人)以及伦理和社会问题(3 人)。焦点小组通过 Zoom 进行,专家们在小组中听取了关于研究目的的简要介绍,分成若干小组,根据各自小组的专长确定关键问题,然后再次召开会议,与其他小组分享确定的问题,并讨论解决这些问题的潜在建议。对焦点小组进行了录像和誊写。由此产生的转录和会议记录被导入 MAXQDA 2018 进行专题分析:临床专家指出了临床系统、临床管理者、临床医生和患者关心的问题。组织和监管专家强调了问责、合规和法律保障方面的问题。伦理和社会环境专家提出了信任、透明度、数字鸿沟以及与健康相关的数字自主权等问题。因此,专家们提出了六项建议,这些建议可以解决大多数已发现的问题:(1)根据患者的偏好设计界面;(2)确保在不同人群中进行测试;(3)确保遵守现有政策;(4)向高层管理人员展示潜在的积极成果;(5)保持临床工作流程;以及(6)提高公众对区块链的认识:本研究发现了与在临床环境中部署 MediLinker 相关的大量 CORES 问题。此外,本研究还发现了几项可解决这些问题的建议。研究结果提高了人们对 CORES 问题的认识,在设计、开发和部署医疗保健区块链时应考虑这些问题。此外,研究结果还为 MediLinker 从原型发展为用于临床测试的最小可行产品提供了更多见解。未来的研究可以使用 CORES 作为社会技术模型,以确定与在临床环境中部署医疗信息技术相关的问题和建议。
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
CiteScore
2.40
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信