Dr Stefan Heansel (Franciscus Hospital Rotterdam, the Netherlands) explained how GDPR may influence clinical practice because we cannot spontaneously gather data anymore without asking the patient for consent in a specific and structured manner. The main purpose of GDPR is: (1) to establish the right of control and access to personal data, (2) to protect the rights of patients and confidentiality of personal data, and (3) to ensure that all health organisations are able to prove that they meet GDPR standards. GDPR applies to public data (name, address, birthdate), genetic data (“inherited or acquired genetic characteristics of a person which give unique information about the physiology or health of that natural person”), and health data (“data related to the physical or mental health of a person, including the provision of health care services, which reveal information about his or her health status”). Important take-home messages were that sharing data is allowed between institutions and does not require separate consent, meaning that an office practice can always consult with colleagues at the hospital without approaching the patient specifically for that purpose. The conditions are that the exchange must be appropriate, limited to what is necessary for the patient’s immediate health, and that the other institution is also bound by professional secrecy. Examples of approved transfers of data are referrals, transmural video conferences, or additional information from earlier consultations. The main message is that transfer of patient data should not be discouraged by GDPR, but that organising your network properly will facilitate optimal treatment of your patients within the constraints of this law.
Posted on
Previous Article
« Bisphosphonates and denosumab Next Article
Minimally invasive surgical techniques must compete against pharmacotherapy in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) »
« Bisphosphonates and denosumab Next Article
Minimally invasive surgical techniques must compete against pharmacotherapy in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) »
Table of Contents: EAU 2019
Featured articles
Prostate Cancer
Barentsz Trial – Bi-parametric MRI versus multi-parametric MRI
Enzalutamide plus ADT improves outcomes for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer
Prostate cancer active surveillance: Better patient risk stratification and use of imaging
The role of pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer: Extended vs standard
When to use imaging and imaging-guided therapies
Radioguided surgery is the future?
Bladder Cancer
Largest safety study of its kind with atezolizumab in metastatic bladder cancer
Bladder cancer risk and early detection
Consensus treatment pathway for patients with limited pelvic lymph node involvement in otherwise localised bladder cancer
FGFR3 gene mutation: Favourable prognostic impact in bladder cancer
Bladder cancer in young patients
Spanish study directly links surgical volume with mortality in bladder cancer patients undergoing cystectomy
Updated interim results of phase 2 trial of pembrolizumab for high-risk NMIBC unresponsive to BCG
Robot-assisted radical cystectomy or open radical cystectomy?
Renal Transplantation and Renal Cell Carcinoma
Andrology
Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (microTESE)
Male infertility/Premature ejaculation
Testosterone replacement therapy: Safe and maybe even protective
Focus on treatment of erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease
Penile prosthesis implantation
Functional Urology
Decision aids are too difficult for patients
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
The Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial
Minimally invasive surgical techniques must compete against pharmacotherapy in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH)
Related Articles
© 2024 Medicom Medical Publishers. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy