Hospital Infection Control in wake of Ebola Virus

As part of a research project studying the implications of deploying third party hospital vendor technology in a clinical setting, we are curious to hear feedback from some of the forum participants on the topic of using biometrics for patient identification in hospitals (a growing trend in the industry) and how that relates to maintaining a hygienic environment for patients and staff, especially in the wake of the Ebola scare.

At issue is deploying biometric identification devices that require physical contact by a patient vs. deploying biometric modalities that do not require contact. In the overall context of maintaining a healthy, hygienic environment that avoids having patients come into contact with devices that other patients have physically touched, the questions that we are seeking feedback from patients/forum participants are:

1. If your hospital implemented a biometric device for identification that required you to physically touch it, would you be willing to make contact? Why or why not?
2. Even if hospital staff disinfected a biometric hardware device after each patient comes in contact, would you trust that the device was safe for you to now touch?
3. Considering the increased awareness of maintaining a safe and hygienic environment for patients because of the Ebola virus, if your hospital implemented a biometric patient identification device that did not require you to touch anything (e.g - a iris recognition camera) - would you be more willing to participate in the biometric patient identification initiative?

Thank you.
Tweet