PHR security and usability

In my informatics course we have been discussing PHRs. There seems a consensus that PHRs are a good idea, but security and reliability are items of concern. I believe this technology will only increase in the future and healthcare professionals need to be aware of the issues surrounding PHRs.

Here are a few references for review and reflection:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/personal_health_records_lots_of_interest_no_users.phpThis article talks to the number PHR users and suggests that consumer motivation may also be a significant factor for relatively low rate of adoption.

http://geekdoctor.blogspot.com/2008/12/privacy-framework-for-personal-health.htmlDr Halamka describes security standards being considered at a national level for PHRs.

http://www.usercentric.com/publications/2009/01/phr/This post compares Google Health and Microsoft Health Vault. While Google has a bit of an edge, both companies have a lot to lose if their records are not secure. The partnership of Google Health with Cleveland Clinic and Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital as well as the partnership between Microsoft and Kaiser Permanente seem good indicators that the systems have undergone rigorous review.

Medicare has started a PHR pilot project in Arizona and Utah. Google Health is one of the options. http://www.medicare.gov/PHR/PHRChoice.aspI'm not very concerned about the security issues, particularly if the PHR owner chooses a strong password as we discussed in class. I think motivation and consistency will be a greater problem for many who choose to create a PHR. Is some information better than none? Willl a partially completed or maintained PHR be any different than the current fragmented documentation of health issues for people who visit multiple providers?