# Presentation: 151435

## Personal Health Records: Overview of Patient Identity Proofing Practices

- Follow-Up Presentation to the AHIC
- Confidentiality, Privacy and Security Workgroup
- May 17, 2007

## Background

- Initial research findings briefed at February 20, 2007 CPS WG meeting
- Additional research requested by CPS WG to determine how much, if any, verification of identity information was being performed by PHR providers

## Introduction

- Thirteen (13) companies identified as “value-added” PHR service providers (e.g., more than just journal services requiring interaction with a 3rd party)
- Five responses received:
- Primetime Medical Software, Inc.
- Laxor, LLC
- Epic Systems
- Dr. I-Net
- Cerner Corporation
- In addition, received one response from a technology provider – Anakam

## Response Summary

- Primetime Medical Software:
- Not a PHR provider
- Medical history product integrates into existing PHR/EHR solutions
- Typically a relationship exists between PHR/EHR provider and patient
- Laxor:
- Leverages a Personal Health Information Manager (PHIM) to assist patient in establishing a PHR account
- PHIMs assist in performing patient identity proofing and 3rd party identity proofing

## Response Summary (cont.)

- Epic Systems:
- PHR service is extension of EHR service typically sold to care providers
- Identity proofing of patient typically performed at time of care being provided to patient
- Activation code mailed to patient’s home to complete PHR account setup
- Aware of KBA technology to support identity proofing, but could not identify any PHR providers
- Dr. I-Net:
- Minimal to no identity proofing being performed since it is a free service
- Used to have a more rigorous identity proofing process similar to banking, but users did not like the process
- Can implement privately branded solution for customers if necessary

## Response Summary (cont.)

- Cerner Corporation:
- Current solution requires relationship with a healthcare entity, such as a provider or insurer
- Future solution would preferably leverage an “independent health data bank” that would be “responsible for rigorously providing identity proofing” information to healthcare entities
- Anakam:
- KBA-based technology provider
- Can leverage public and private databases to generate personalized questions during identity proofing process
- Working with a Government agency (prior relationship w/ patient) and a commercial entity (no prior relationship w/ patient)

## Observations

- The pool of PHR providers w/ no prior relationship and offering 3rd party services is smaller than originally researched – the market is an emerging market
- Majority of those PHR providers responding to this follow up research see value in having a relationship established with the patient
- Technology such as KBA not as widespread as in other industries (e.g., financial)
- KBA technology more useful when tied into private databases – but this generally means a relationship with the patient exists
- One PHR provider posed the idea of a “health data bank” for enhancing patient identity proofing where no prior relationship exists

## Considerations for the CPS WG

- Given the emerging PHR provider marketplace:
- Let the market evolve and gain “lessons learned” before making any recommendations
- Develop recommendations now to help shape the evolving marketplace – does not necessarily have to be detailed to inhibit creativity and market evolution
- Determine the suitability of KBA technology in an electronic health care environment:
- Using only public databases
- Leveraging private databases

## Thank You!

- Yuriy A. Dzambasow
- A&N Associates, Inc.
- 410-859-5449 x107 / yuriy@anassoc.com