EMarchini

Pam, I don't know very much about it other than in the past you were unable to cancel something such as a scan of a fingerprint and now you can. There's quite a bit of information about the research that is being done and what they have developed so far on the internet. One article that you might like is at NCBI on Pub Med. It can be found at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17299214. I hope this helps! Elizabeth

Marrisa, I noticed when I was at ICU at St. Jude they were using biometrics in supply room when they need to use the computer or access medications. The device used scanned the nurse's fingerprint. She mentioned that the individual patient's room also has a place to store patient's medication and supplies. The nurses open it by scanning fingerprint as well. I was very impressed with how quick and accurate it was. It seemed much more efficient and secure than typing in a log in name and password or number from an ID badge. However, there are some things such as a medication for a PCA pump that was sent up that a patient didn't need right away that had to be locked in a safe. The nurses in that case had to use two keys at same time to access it and use keys to install or remove it from PCA pump. I suppose biometrics could be used as well but it seems very expensive to convert everything to biometrics. I suppose with time they will considering keys can be lost or stolen. It will be interesting to see how it is used in healthcare.

The above response was in reply to Pam's post. It won't allow me to reply under her comment the way most threads do.

I agree! I would want to know that it is protected and be reassured that it would be deleted after I left. I like that it is more secure and convenient. I think it is inevitable that it will be used more and more often as well. I think overall this is a good thing but I do have some concerns. One of them you mentioned regarding using more than one system. I mentioned some of my other concerns below. One other concern is that governments want to share this information with each and work together on an international level to use biometrics to catch terrorists. I think that this is good but at same time have concerns about privacy. For example, if we start using fingerprints whenever we buy groceries, gas, etc. Does that mean someone knows where we are all the time? Is that a good or bad thing? I agree that we should have the option of saying no and know who has access to it and how it is processed. I don't know if any laws have been passed regarding how it can or can't be used.

What type of biometrics would the hospital use? The textbook mentions that the iris or retinal scan is very accurate but is less beneficial in healthcare because it takes longer. It takes 10-15 seconds compared to less than 5 seconds for a fingerprint. It mentioned as well that that you would have to remove eyeglasses (Sewell, p. 363). If someone wore contact lens would they have to remove them. I don't think that is very practical. The length of time it takes to to scan the iris or retina is not practical as well. The advantage of a log in name and password is that if you forget it or it is stolen you can get a new password. The disadvantage of a fingerprint is that you wouldn't be able to do that if something were to happen and you no longer had fingerprint. The way the biometric system is set up there is no way to cancel it or reissue a new one. However, I did read that the first fingerprint cancelable biometric has just been developed. I'm not sure when it will be available to buy and install though. I think this would be necessary as a precaution. Does that mean if can you cancel one it and reissue a new one it is less secure as a result? I think it might put someone in danger of being stalked and assaulted. I don't know how accurate it is but there have been reports of thieves cutting off the fingers of victim to try to use prints to steal BMW. I heard of someone having used a prints of someone's fingerprints to break into a vault. However, I realize that these are most likely not accurate but that doesn't mean someone won't try it. I think any system that only uses only one way of securing a system is at risk. I think it should have a back up system as well. I think the same concerns apply to using a voice recognition. What would happen if you had a cold or injured it in some way? The textbook mentions that it can be used long distance over the phone. What would happen if someone forced you to use your voice to get through? What if someone is fired? Is there a way to prevent them from getting into system? However, I do like the that it is two to three times more accurate than fingerprints. The textbook mentioned that it is less expensive as well (Sewell, p. 363). I realize in a healthcare setting many of these wouldn't be of concern. I don't think I would have a problem if the hospital I worked at wanted to use biometrics to store employee information. It seems like it would be much more secure. It seems like it would be quicker and more convenient as well. However, I would want to know what happens to my information if I were to no longer work for them. I would want to know who else might have access to information and how else it might be used as well.