BMA annual representative meeting: Debate needed on balance between patient confidentiality and needs of research
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
A proposal for a wider debate on the balance between the need for personal health information to be confidential and the need to do research was carried as a "reference" to the council (for the council to consider and develop at a later date).
Professor Peter Dangerfield, representing the Liverpool division, emphasised the importance of confidentiality but also pointed out that researchers often need to collect data. He said that a person抯 health information was private to the patient and should not be passed around. Confidentiality was important in the doctor-patient relationship.
But people engaged in epidemiological or other research needed to collect data, he said, adding that anonymised data cut researchers off from important information, such as names, addresses, and dates of birth.
Professor Dangerfield called for public and patient support for a rational debate on the whole issue. Doctors were bound by codes of ethics and confidentiality and could be trusted with key information that was essential for research. Much of the research that he would like to do was being conducted in countries whose rules were less strict.
Dr Fay Wilson, a GP in Birmingham, said that she felt she had a personal duty to preserve the confidentiality of her patients?health information. "Once is available in personalised form to medical researchers, how can we possibly resist it being transferred on to others?" she asked. If information was made available for research purposes, the next step might be for it to be made available for child care purposes or for the defence of the nation.
Dr Gill Beck from Buckinghamshire division said that she had no problem with a debate on confidentiality but that the motion went further and said that confidentiality can and should be breached. She felt that as a GP she was under increasing pressure to release identifiable patient data. "There is no justification for me to release confidential patient information other than with the patient抯 informed consent," she said.
The chairman of the BMA抯 ethics committee said that the debate showed how much work needed to be done, and he said that a paper on the issue would be published on the ethics website.
The motion, which was passed as a reference to council, said: "This Meeting calls on the BMA to debate the issues surrounding confidentiality and the real concerns that the present climate is becoming counter-productive, particularly for research, and to produce a policy which will allow for a fair balance between confidentiality and communication."(BMJ Linda Beecham)
Professor Peter Dangerfield, representing the Liverpool division, emphasised the importance of confidentiality but also pointed out that researchers often need to collect data. He said that a person抯 health information was private to the patient and should not be passed around. Confidentiality was important in the doctor-patient relationship.
But people engaged in epidemiological or other research needed to collect data, he said, adding that anonymised data cut researchers off from important information, such as names, addresses, and dates of birth.
Professor Dangerfield called for public and patient support for a rational debate on the whole issue. Doctors were bound by codes of ethics and confidentiality and could be trusted with key information that was essential for research. Much of the research that he would like to do was being conducted in countries whose rules were less strict.
Dr Fay Wilson, a GP in Birmingham, said that she felt she had a personal duty to preserve the confidentiality of her patients?health information. "Once is available in personalised form to medical researchers, how can we possibly resist it being transferred on to others?" she asked. If information was made available for research purposes, the next step might be for it to be made available for child care purposes or for the defence of the nation.
Dr Gill Beck from Buckinghamshire division said that she had no problem with a debate on confidentiality but that the motion went further and said that confidentiality can and should be breached. She felt that as a GP she was under increasing pressure to release identifiable patient data. "There is no justification for me to release confidential patient information other than with the patient抯 informed consent," she said.
The chairman of the BMA抯 ethics committee said that the debate showed how much work needed to be done, and he said that a paper on the issue would be published on the ethics website.
The motion, which was passed as a reference to council, said: "This Meeting calls on the BMA to debate the issues surrounding confidentiality and the real concerns that the present climate is becoming counter-productive, particularly for research, and to produce a policy which will allow for a fair balance between confidentiality and communication."(BMJ Linda Beecham)