GDPR: Working with health data can cause headaches

GDPR: Working with health data can cause headaches

GDPR: Working with health data can cause headaches


One of the key points of this new legislative framework concerns the processing of health data.

Because health-related information is very sensitive in nature, and the use of them can have an adverse effect on a person’s private life and reputation, the GDPR imposes a higher standard of protection for the processing of health data. This higher standard, aimed at protecting the fundamental rights and privacy of patients, results in a higher burden on the professionals in the health sector who will have comply with it.

Sensitive data

As a general rule, healthcare professionals (doctors, pharmacists, nurses, healthcare insurers, and other healthcare service-providers) are prohibited from “processing” health data about their patients unless they have obtained the explicit and informed consent of the patient to do so or unless it is done under specific circumstances set out in the law. Therefore, healthcare professionals are in principle not allowed to collect, record, store, alter, use, or disclose any “information which relates to the physical or mental health of an individual, or to the provision of health services to the individual” without the patient’s consent. This can include anything from medical records, examination results, medical history, a disease, or a person’s psychological state.

One of the circumstances under which health data can be processed even without the explicit consent of the patient, however, is when a healthcare professional who is subject to a legal obligation of professional secrecy or a similar obligation of confidentiality, such as a doctor, nurse or pharmacist, needs to collect, store or use health data, or needs to communicate with another healthcare professional, for health-related purposes (e.g., medical diagnosis, provision of care, or treatment) of the patient in question. 

The GDPR also allows the processing of health data for reasons of public interest in the area of public health, such as protecting against serious cross-border health threats. There can indeed be situations in which sensitive health data need to be communicated to certain authorities so that the right measures can be taken to protect the citizens. This could be the case when tracing the contacts of an infected person in order to prevent the (further) spreading of a contagious disease, such as ebola or tuberculosis, etc.

Considering the sensitive nature of health information, it is imperative that professionals in the health sector who work with such data (“data controllers”) are aware of their obligations under the GDPR, and the patients or people whose data are being processed (“data subjects”) are aware of their rights. Data controllers have, for instance, the obligation to secure health data that are under their control and to notify the authorities of any data breaches. This means that every independent healthcare professional or health service provider must take the appropriate security measures to make sure his/her patients’ health data are kept secure. This is done by, for example, securing personal computers with private logins and passwords and by installing firewall updates and antivirus software. If the personal computer or hard drive onto which patients’ records are saved is stolen or is unrightfully accessed through the internet, the GDPR obliges the healthcare professional or service provider, as the case may be, to notify this  “data breach” to the competent DPA within 72 hours from when it became aware of it.

Furthermore, when processing health data, the data controller (for example, a physician or hospital) has  a number of obligations to fulfill. The data subject must be informed about the specific purpose for which information about his/her health is collected or used, and the data subject must be allowed to exercise his/her rights to access or change/update this information free of charge. For instance, a patient is entitled to a free copy of his/her medical records containing information such as diagnosis and test results. Additionally, a patient has the right to obtain from his/her doctor the correction of any inaccurate information about his/her health, and, in certain cases, he/she also has the right to object to the processing or use of his/her health data and even the right to have some data about his/her health situation removed from the file.

The cloud doctor

Healthcare professionals are increasingly tempted to keep medical records of their patients on servers connected to the internet or in the “cloud”, and not merely on paper. Hence, the risk of data being unrightfully accessed becomes bigger. By the same token, data breaches are more likely to happen, and health data are more likely to be stolen. The cloud is indeed not always the safest place to store such data, as evidenced by the numerous data leaks making news headlines these days. Also, if the cloud infrastructure used is located outside the EU, the data are effectively exported outside the EU thereby triggering additional concerns, conditions, and even obligations. Therefore, if cloud-service providers seek to convince the health industry of the benefits that the cloud could offer, they should offer state of the art security or at least inform medical practitioners about the existing security levels that are in place and about the precise location where the data will be stored physically. 

Even if the security of health data might be more at risk if they are stored in the cloud,   various national governments are taking steps towards a more “connected” health system. For example, the Belgian government recently put forth its e-health initiative (, which is a “cloud” platform focused on the exchange of patients’ health information by healthcare professionals. The data on this platform can be accessed by doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare providers throughout the country, and not only by the treating doctor. Finally, it is not only the medical practitioner but also the cloud-service provider who will have direct legal obligations and responsibilities under the GDPR, including the security and breach-notification obligations. This seems more than logical as the cloud-service provider is the one actually conducting the “processing” of the health data whereas the doctor, on his/her part, has no control over the actual technical security measures that are implemented on the external data-storage servers of this cloud-storage service provider. It will therefore be not only the professionals in the sector but also the cloud-service providers that need to step up in order to offer more secure storage of health data. 
The regulation can be accessed here. It will enter into force 20 days after its publication in the EU Official Journal. Its provisions will be directly applicable in all member states two years after this date of publication.

To read more about this series of articles (and the articles that were published previously), please click here.


Related news

02.10.2019 EU law
Seminar: Data protection implications of (a no-deal) Brexit

Seminar - On October 2nd at 4 pm, we organize a seminar where we will discus the implications of a (no-deal) Brexit on data protection.  These issues affect all businesses interacting between UK and EEA (including EU) and which send or receive data to and from UK. We will highlight the main challenges both in the case of a hard Brexit on 31 October 2019 and in other scenarios. We will also offer guidelines to help your organisation mitigate the respective risks.

Read more

27.09.2019 NL law
Stibbe is attending the IBA's annual conference in Seoul

Conference - The annual conference of the International Bar Association (IBA) is currently taking place in Seoul. There are fourteen partners from Stibbe attending the event. Several of them have speaking slots on a wide range of legal topics and will take part in various panel discussions.

Read more

19.08.2019 EU law
Enable “likes” and bear joint-controllership

Articles - The Court of Justice of the European Union recently ruled, in Case C-40/14 Fashion ID GmbH & Co. KG v Verbraucherzentrale NRW eV,  that a website operator that features “Like” social-media plugin from Facebook likely qualifies as joint-controller with Facebook for its website visitors’ personal data collection and transmission to Facebook.

Read more

28.08.2019 NL law
Masterclass: e-signature and electronic identifiers

Masterclass - Stibbe is organising a Masterclass on 26 September 2019 in Amsterdam on the subject of e-signature and electronic identifiers. This Masterclass will cover the legal framework and focus especially on the numerous possibilities for applying the various electronic signatures in different situations. In addition, we explain the regulations governing electronic identifiers, and the mandatory European recognition they receive.

Read more

Our website uses functional cookies for the functioning of the website and analytic cookies that enable us to generate aggregated visitor data. We also use other cookies, such as third party tracking cookies - please indicate whether you agree to the use of these other cookies:

Privacy – en cookieverklaring