Skip to main content

Modernizing Healthcare by Using Blockchain

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Applications of Blockchain in Healthcare

Part of the book series: Studies in Big Data ((SBD,volume 83))

Abstract

Electronic health record (EHR) systems are designed and deployed to store data accurately and to capture the state of a patient across time, and they have been one of the major drivers to advance care in the last decade. However, the EHR is not eligible in supporting a model that is beyond episodic visits, nor the idea of an integrated care plan that all care team members can view and contribute to. On the other hand, the concept of a longitudinal record and the idea of a “smart care plan” are key factors for paving the way toward Predictive, Preventive, Personalized and Participatory (P4-medicine), which arguably will be in a near future the only effective and sustainable approach for pandemics and “silent” chronic diseases. At the current state-of-the-art, the HL7 FHIR standard and distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) are two very promising areas of research and development in the context of health information management, and a proper synergy among their approaches, concepts and tools could overcome the limitations of EHR systems, giving rise to the hub of the IT infrastructure for P4-medicine. This chapter explores the potential and challenges of integrating the FHIR standard into DLTs, also through a concrete example of implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    It may be the case that a single server offers multiple services (i.e.; resources): thus it is important to distinguish among different services deployed by the same server, for example through FHIR resource acronyms.

References

  • Ainsworth, J., & Buchan, I. (2012). COCPIT: A tool for integrated care pathway variance analysis. Study Health Technology Information, 180, 995–999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antilope. (2015). Advancing eHealth Interoperability Available at: https://www.antilope-project.eu/front/index.html.

  • Bentov, I., et al. (2014). Proof of activity: Extending bitcoin’s proof of work via proof of stake [extended abstract]. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 42(3), 34–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentov, I., Gabizon, A., & Mizrahi, A. (2016). Cryptocurrencies without proof of work. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 142–157). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings, J. (2005). What do we mean by integrated care? A European interpretation. Journal of Integrated Care, 13(5), 13–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CALLIOPE Network. (2010). CALL for InterOPErability. Available at: https://www.eu-patient.eu/whatwedo/Projects/completed-projects/CALLIOPE-Network/.

  • Castro, M. & Liskov, B. (1999). Practical Byzantine fault tolerance. In OSDI (Vol. 99, No. 1999, pp. 173–186).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhry, B., et al. (2006). Systematic review: Impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 144(10), 742–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, L. et al. (2017). On security analysis of proof of elapsed-time (PoET). In International Symposium on Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems (pp. 282–297). Springer, Cham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciampi, M. et al. (2019). A blockchain architecture for the Italian EHR system. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Informatics and Assistive Technologies for Health-Care, Medical Support and WellbeingHEALTHINFO (pp. 11–17).

    Google Scholar 

  • Daian, P., Pass, R., & Shi, E. (2019). Snow white: Robustly reconfigurable consensus and applications to provably secure proof of stake. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 23–41). Springer, Cham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan, S., Reiter, M. K., & Zhang, H. (2018). Beat: Asynchronous bft made practical. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 2028–2041).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwork, C., Lynch, N., & Stockmeyer, L. (1988). Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 35(2), 288–323.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • E-SENS. (2016). Electronic simple European networked services. Available at: https://www.esens.eu/.

  • eHGI. (2014). The European eHealth Governance Initiative. Available at: https://www.ehgi.eu/default.aspx.

  • epSOS. (2014). Smart Open Services for European Patients. Available at: https://www.epsos.org/.

  • Esposito, A., Sicuranza, M., & Ciampi, M. (2013). A patient centric approach for modeling access control in EHR systems. Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing. ICA3PP 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (vol. 8286, pp. 225–232) Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • EXPAND. (2015). Deploying sustainable cross-border eHealth services in the EU. Available at: https://www.expandproject.eu/.

  • Fico, G., et al. (2016). Integration of personalized healthcare pathways in an ICT platform for diabetes managements: A small-scale exploratory study. IEEE Journal Biomed Health Information, 20(1), 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Góngora Alonso, S., de la Torre Díez, I., & García Zapiraín, B. (2019). Predictive, personalized, preventive and participatory (4P) medicine applied to telemedicine and eHealth in the literature. Journal of Medical Systems, 43, 140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardt, D. (2012). The OAuth 2.0 authorization framework. Request For Comment 6749.

    Google Scholar 

  • HL7 CSS. (2018). HL7 Service functional model: Coordination of care service, STU, Release 1. Available at: https://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=452.

  • HL7 DAM. (2016). HL7 Version 3 Domain Analysis Model: Care Plan Release 1. Available at: https://www.hl7.org/implement/standards/product_brief.cfm?product_id=435.

  • HL7 FHIR. (2020). HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources. Available at: https://www.hl7.org/fhir/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • HLF. (2020). Hyperledger Fabric Documentation. https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • IHE. (2020). Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise. Available at: https://www.ihe.net/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • IHE PCC. (2020). IHE Patient Care Coordination domain. Available at: https://www.ihe.net/ihe_domains/patient_care_coordination/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • IHE PCC DCP. (2020). IHE PCC Dynamic Care Planning Integration Profile, Release 3.1, Trial Implementation. Available at: https://www.ihe.net/uploadedFiles/Documents/PCC/IHE_PCC_Suppl_DCP.pdf (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • IHE Wiki. (2020). Available at: https://wiki.ihe.net/index.php/Main_Page (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • Kilintzis, V. et al. (2019). Supporting integrated care with a flexible data management framework built upon Linked Data, HL7 FHIR and ontologies. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., & Deka, G. C. (2019). Advanced Applications of Blockchain Technology. Studies in Big Data 60, Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, S., & Nadal, S. (2012). Ppcoin: Peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof of stake, self-published paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsman, L., et al. (2010). What is a clinical pathway? Development of a definition to inform the debate. BMC Med, 8, 31–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kodner, D., & Spreeuwenberg, C. (2002). Integrated care: meaning, logic, applications, and implications—a discussion paper. International Journal of Integrated Care, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogias, E. et al. (2016). Enhancing bitcoin security and performance with strong consistency via collective signing. In 25th Usenix security symposium (Usenix security 16) (pp. 279–296).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, J. (2014). Tendermint: Consensus without mining. Draft v. 0.6, fall, 1 (11).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamport, L., Shostak, R., & Pease, M. (1982). The byzantine generals problem. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 4(3), 382–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Micali, S., & Vaikuntanathan, V. (2017). Optimal and player-replaceable consensus with an honest majority. MIT-CSAIL-TR-2017–004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. et al. (2016). The honey badger of BFT protocols. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 31–42).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer to Peer Electronic Cash System, self-published paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Namasudra, S. (2019). An improved attribute‐based encryption technique towards the data security in cloud computing. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Exercise, 31(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Namasudra, S. et al. (2020). The revolution of blockchain: State-of-the-art and research challenges. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • NCHIT. (2018). National Alliance for Health Information Technology, Defining Key Health Information Technology Terms.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panella, M., & Vanhaecht, K. (2010). Is there still need for confusion about pathways? International Journal Care of Pathw, 14(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pease, M., Shostak, R., & Lamport, L. (1980). Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 27(2), 228–234.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Richer, J., & Mandel, J. (2018). Harvard Medical School Department of Biomedical Informatics, Health Relationship Trust Profile for Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) OAuth 2.0 Scopes—openid-heart-fhir-oauth2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinkeby. (2020). Rinkeby TestNet Explorer. Available at https://rinkeby.etherscan.io/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • Ropsten. (2020). Ropsten TestNet Explorer. Available at https://ropsten.etherscan.io/ (Accessed on 30th June 2020).

  • Rotter, T., et al. (2010). Clinical pathways: Effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs. Cochrane Database Systematic Review, 3, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotter, T. (2013). Clinical Pathways in Hospitals: Evaluating effects and costs (p. 2013). Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saltini, R., & Hyland-Wood, D. (2019). IBFT 2.0: A Safe and Live Variation of the IBFT Blockchain Consensus Protocol for Eventually Synchronous Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.10194.

  • Schlieter, H. et al. (2017). Towards adaptive pathways—Reference architecture for personalized dynamic pathways. https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI.2017.55.

  • Schwartz, D., Youngs, N., & Britto, A. (2014). The ripple protocol consensus algorithm. Ripple Labs Inc White Paper, 5(8).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, H-B., & Hong, F. (2006). An attribute-based access control model for web services. Seventh International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing, Applications and Technologies, PDCAT ‘06, December, pp. 74–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trillium Bridge. (2015). Bridging Patient Summaries across the Atlantic. Available at: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/610756/it.

  • Trillium Bridge II. (2019). Reinforcing the Bridges and Scaling up EU/US Cooperation on Patient Summary. Available at: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/727745/it.

  • VALUeHEALTH. (2017). Establishing the value and business model for sustainable eHealth services in Europe. https://www.ehtel.eu/activities/eu-funded-projects/valuehealth.html.

  • Zamanov, A. R., Erokhin, V. A., & Fedotov, P. S. (2018). ASIC-resistant hash functions. In 2018 IEEE Conference of Russian Young Researchers in Electrical and Electronic Engineering (EIConRus) (pp. 394–396). IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario Ciampi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ciampi, M., Esposito, A., Marangio, F., Sicuranza, M., Schmid, G. (2021). Modernizing Healthcare by Using Blockchain. In: Namasudra, S., Deka, G.C. (eds) Applications of Blockchain in Healthcare. Studies in Big Data, vol 83. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9547-9_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics