Objective
Similar to the Institute for healthcare improvement, our systems project will focus on at
least one of the three critical objectives that can potentially lead better models for
providing better healthcare. The following critical objectives are:
● Improve the health of the defined population
● Enhance patient care experience (including quality access and reliability)
● Reduce or at least control the per capita cost of care
Our project would like to focus on improving the health of a defined population by investigating medical device hacking and its various effects on the population. Based on our findings in the previous section, we would like to learn about the following regarding medical device hacking:
● Positive and negative implications for medical device hacking
● How vulnerable are medical devices really?
● How vulnerable are hospitals are to a malware attack?
From this project, we would like to learn the answers to our questions as well as gain an
understanding of the size of the medical device hacking space.
Research Method
We will begin our research with news articles to provide an idea of various cases of
medical device hacking. From there we would like to identify how often these breaches
occur by utilizing a data source provided either by Dr. Weisband or other external source.
After exploring the frequency of medical device hacks, we would like to explore how
often breaches like such happen in hospitals.
Expected Conclusion
Our early research, specifically the article about the Mayo clinic hiring the hackers, is extremely relevant to what we expect to find, although we do not think other companies may take the same proactive approach that Mayo did to correct their problems.
The likely final solution will have to end up being some sort of government regulation to ensure that all future medical devices are equipped with the proper security so the users will not be harmed by hackers or other invasive systems.
Did you get my link to the Ted Talk by Avi Rubin? See my comment to yours. Here is the link. https://www.ted.com/talks/avi_rubin_all_your_devices_can_be_hacked
ReplyDeleteI also look at ProPublica for some good investigative journalism on health. Here is one on Four Medical Implants That Escaped FDA Scrutiny. It begins: "Medical devices sustain and improve the quality of life for millions of Americans. But as the over $100 billion-a-year industry pushes thousands of devices to market every year, reports of faulty devices, repeat surgeries, and recalls have increased. The FDA and the industry maintain that a speedy approval process gives patients faster access to life-saving devices. But critics say that unlike drugs, a substantial number of risky devices are cleared without clinical testing, and receive almost no oversight once on the market.
ReplyDeleteProPublica took a closer look at four types of implantable medical devices that have drawn the most criticism.
If medical devices are not approved by the FDA, then what prevents them from being secure from hacking?
DeleteAnother student posted this article on his blog. (Good to look at what others are doing, too.) The Health Data Conundrum. Check out the links, too.
ReplyDeleteAnother student posted this article on his blog. (Good to look at what others are doing, too.) The Health Data Conundrum. Check out the links, too. It's not about devices, per se, but the implication for patient control may be relevant for some devices. The problem, of course, is that some devices are not owned by the patients, even if they are implanted in them.
ReplyDelete