Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2003 Aug;18(8):659-69.
doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20823.x.

Patient perspectives of medical confidentiality: a review of the literature

Affiliations
Review

Patient perspectives of medical confidentiality: a review of the literature

Pamela Sankar et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2003 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To lay the groundwork for a better understanding of patient views on medical confidentiality.

Design: Studies were found by searching medline, bioethicsline, and selected bibliographies. Articles concerning physician perspectives or implications of legal and administrative regulations were excluded. Only peer-reviewed journal articles reporting original research on patients' confidentiality views and conduct were included.

Main results: Many patients are unaware of or misunderstand their legal or ethical right to medical confidentiality protections, which leads them to both over- and underestimate confidentiality protections. The possibility that medical information might be revealed, intentionally or not, to acquaintances in a clinic or other social community troubles patients as much as information release to insurers or employers. A significant minority of patients distrust confidentiality protections, leading some to report that they delay or forgo medical care. If doubtful that confidentiality will be upheld, patients will act independently to protect information.

Conclusions: Our review found a wider variety of understandings and beliefs about medical confidentiality among patients than are often indicated in the writings of practitioners or legal experts. As medical confidentiality regulations evolve, these differences need to be recognized and accounted for in interactions between practitioners and patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegler M. Confidentiality in medicine—a decrepit concept. N Engl J Med. 1982;307:1518–21. - PubMed
    1. Wynia M, Coughlin SS, Alpert S, Cummins DS, Emanuel LL. Shared expectations for protection of identifiable health care information: report of a national consensus process. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:100–11. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Eisenberg JM. Can you keep a secret? Measuring the performance of those entrusted with personal health information. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:132–4. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, DHHS. Final rule. Fed Regist. 2000;65:82462–829. (See particularly sections IIID) - PubMed
    1. Ford CA, Millstein SG. Delivery of confidentiality assurances to adolescents by primary care physicians. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1997;151:505–9. - PubMed

Publication types