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
. 2022 Jan;38(2):351-355.
doi: 10.12669/pjms.38.ICON-2022.5785.

Patient perception regarding privacy and confidentiality: A study from the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan

Syed Ghazanfar Saleem  1 , Saima Ali  2 , Nida Ghouri  3 , Quratulain Maroof  4 , Muhammad Imran Jamal  5 , Tariq Aziz  6 , David Shapiro  7 , Megan Rybarczyk  8
Affiliations

Patient perception regarding privacy and confidentiality: A study from the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan

Syed Ghazanfar Saleem et al. Pak J Med Sci. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Background and objective: Maintaining privacy and ensuring confidentiality with patients is paramount to developing an effective patient-provider relationship. This is often challenging in over-crowded Emergency Departments (EDs). This survey was designed to explore patients' perceptions on maintenance of privacy and confidentiality and their subsequent interactions with providers in a busy tertiary care hospital in Karachi.

Methods: Trained nursing staff conducted structured interviews with 571 patients who presented to The Indus Hospital (TIH) ED from January to December 2020. All patients were 14 years of age or older, could speak and understand Urdu, and provide informed consent. Patients were asked about their perceptions of privacy and confidentiality in the ED and whether this affected their interactions with providers.

Results: Respondents were primarily men (64%) under the age of 45 (62%) presenting for the first time (49%). The majority of patients felt that privacy and confidentiality were maintained, however 10% of patients reported that they had rejected examination due to privacy concerns and 15% of patients reported that they had changed or omitted information provided to a provider due to confidentiality concerns. There was correlation between privacy and confidentiality concerns and patient-provider interactions (p<0.0001).

Conclusions: Despite the often over-crowded and busy environment of the ED, patients generally felt that privacy and confidentiality were maintained. Given the correlation between perception and behavior and the importance of an effective patient-provider relationship, particularly in the acute setting when morbidity and mortality is high, initiatives that focus on maintaining privacy and confidentiality should be pursued.

Keywords: Confidentiality; Emergency Department; Patient perception; Patient-provider interactions; Privacy; Survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None.

Figures

Fig.1A
Fig.1A
Patient perception of maintenance of confidentiality of medical information.
Fig.1B
Fig.1B
Patient’s perception of privacy with speaking about their concerns.
Fig.2A
Fig.2A
Patient-provider interactions regarding communication as a result of perceived lack of maintenance of privacy and/or confidentiality.
Fig.2B
Fig.2B
Patient-provider interactions regarding physical examination as a result of perceived lack of maintenance of privacy and/or confidentiality.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gostin LO, Levit LA, Nass SJ. Beyond the HIPAA privacy rule:Enhancing privacy, improving health through research. National Acad Sci. 2009:NBK9578. doi:10.17226/12458. - PubMed
    1. Siegler M. Confidentiality in medicine—a decrepit concept. Mass Medical Soc. 1982;307:1518–1521. doi:10.1056/NEJM198212093072411. - PubMed
    1. Gordon J, Sheppard LA, Anaf S. The patient experience in the emergency department:A systematic synthesis of qualitative research. Int Emerg Nurs. 2010;18(2):80–88. doi:10.1016/j.ienj.2009.05.004. - PubMed
    1. Asplin BR, Magid DJ, Rhodes KV, Solberg LI, Lurie N, Camargo CA., Jr A conceptual model of emergency department crowding. Ann Emerg Med. 2003;42(2):173–180. doi:10.1067/mem.2003.302. - PubMed
    1. Bartlett S, Fatovich DM. Emergency department patient preferences for waiting for a bed. Emerg Med Australas. 2009;21(1):25–30. doi:10.1111/j.1742-6723.2008.01147.x. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources