Biometric Identification in Healthcare Doesn’t Replace Data Security Best Practices

Cases of improper identity may have devastating outcomes in healthcare. A newborn should pass home with the incorrect parents, or an affected person might get hold of the incorrect medication or prognosis.
Even minor mistakes will have negative consequences — a physician’s office that is gradual to provide an affected person’s files because of a not on time identification technique can erode patient self-assurance, now not to say create delays of their care. To further complicate subjects, currently, the Social Security Number remains commonplace as an identifier, even within the face of improved fraud and statistics breaches.
There’s no motive for sufferers to stay at such chance with extra comfortable and precise virtual techniques available. It’s obvious that the healthcare industry — from small clinics to the largest health center networks — is in need of a better conventional identifier.
One such identifier is really perfect in shape for a brand new ID method in healthcare — biometrics. After all, facial scanning and fingerprint IDs already unencumber many cutting-edge smartphones. And home fitness assessments show purchasers’ growing consolation sharing their organic statistics for stepped forward carrier and convenience. By 2022, it’s far envisioned that 40% of healthcare corporations will use biometric-primarily based identification, and through 2024, the market for technology systems that allow this type of ID will attain $3.5 billion.
But among all of the opportunities for biometrics to make identification more accurate, less time eating and more consistent, healthcare organizations ought to additionally comprehend implementing one of these systems doesn’t make the underlying statistics any extra cozy. Just like an SSN, a thumbprint, an eye fixed experiment or even a vein print is simply a technique of correct identification primarily based on formerly proven and saved information. And if the underlying structures that shop the statistics — from IT infrastructure to document systems — aren’t secure, it doesn’t matter how unique the identifier or mechanism for identity might be.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency unnecessarily shared touchy non-public information of more than million catastrophe sufferers with a contractor, subjecting that data to capacity identification theft and fraud….1
This is troubling to me on some of the degrees.
The Right to Secure PII and PHI
As a U.S. Citizen, I am troubled that one in every one of my authorities corporations did no longer do what changed into important to shield the personal statistics of my fellow citizens. Data privacy is a right and, although this could seem old school, I anticipate my government businesses to shield my rights, not to brush aside them.
Desensitization to the Problem
As a data safety expert, I am, because of every additional breach or, in this situation, an instance of oversharing, desensitizes us to the importance of defensive our for my part identifiable facts (PII) and our personal health information (PHI). But those who have suffered the pain and frustration of getting their identities stolen and long gone through the months and even years of work it takes to clean up the mess will let you know protecting PII is seriously vital to monetary safety and well-being.
Not Employing Best Practices for Protecting Data
As a facts safety professional, I am more than stricken. I’m appalled.
Despite years of facts security assaults, stacks of federal policies, and clear expertise among records safety experts concerning what quality practices for statistics security are, a government agency unnecessarily shared touchy facts of more than million people. You should disregard this as someone, somewhere, creating a simple mistake. But whilst the statistics security of actual humans is concerned, systems ought to be in a location to keep easy mistakes from occurring.