You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Electronics
  • Article
  • Open Access

6 November 2022

SEMRAchain: A Secure Electronic Medical Record Based on Blockchain Technology

,
,
,
,
and
1
MACS Research Laboratory RL16ES22, National Engineering School of Gabes, Gabes 6029, Tunisia
2
Department of Information Systems, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia
3
PRINCE Laboratory Research, ISITcom, University of Sousse, Hammam Sousse, Sousse 4011, Tunisia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Security and Privacy in Blockchain/IoT

Abstract

A medical record is an important part of a patient’s follow-up. It comprises healthcare professionals’ views, prescriptions, analyses, and all information about the patient. Several players, including the patient, the doctor, and the pharmacist, are involved in the process of sharing, and managing this file. Any authorized individual can access the electronic medical record (EMR) from anywhere, and the data are shared among various health service providers. Sharing the EMR requires various conditions, such as security and confidentiality. However, existing medical systems may be exposed to system failure and malicious intrusions, making it difficult to deliver dependable services. Additionally, the features of these systems represent a challenge for centralized access control methods. This paper presents SEMRAchain a system based on Access control (Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC)) and a smart contract approach. This fusion enables decentralized, fine-grained, and dynamic access control management for EMR management. Together, blockchain technology as a secure distributed ledger and access control provides such a solution, providing system stakeholders with not just visibility but also trustworthiness, credibility, and immutability.

1. Introduction

The global IoT medical device market is predicted to increase at a 4.5 percent compound yearly growth rate, reaching $409.5 billion in 2025 [1]. This technology may completely disconnect a patient from the hospital’s centralized system while yet allowing them to speak with their doctor. In the healthcare sector, patient medical data are extremely sensitive, requiring effective privacy protection [2]. These data are typically kept in various places and are manipulated by many healthcare practitioners. With the advancement of technology such as the Internet of Things (IoT) [3] and artificial intelligence (AI) [4], health files are now saved electronically. The use of electronic health files allows for the secure storage of patients’ personal information for the diagnosis of various conditions [5]. This entails digitizing this information and sharing them with healthcare experts, with the patient’s permission, so that they may be updated in real-time in a safe and confidential way [6]. Therefore, the security of medical data is a criterion to be considered. Indeed, many cryptography-based approaches have been built to remedy the security problem and block attacks in healthcare applications using IoT [7].
The proposed schemes [8] provide patient data privacy with authentication. Others resort to the use of AI to develop a protocol and algorithm based on deep learning to ensure privacy and authenticate patient data [9]. For the same purpose, fog computing is leveraged in various other solutions [10]. The volume of transferred data in the offered solutions is enormous, and the network’s scale expands with each new user [11]. As a result, it is critical to secure the integrity and consistency of the intended system, which must fulfill several standards, including strong resilience to attack, respect for patient privacy, and control over access to these data [12].
In a peer-to-peer network, machines and devices connect to one another without the need for intermediaries, resulting in a decentralized network known as the Blockchain [13]. It is, in fact, a network of interconnected nodes that share and record transactions. To avoid a single point of failure, each node in the network stores a copy [14]. The blockchain’s data are organized in blocks that are linked together to form a distributed ledger (DLT). Cryptographic functions protect the data’s security and immutability. Satoshi Nakamoto first proposed the notion of blockchain in 2008 [15]. Blockchain technology is distinguished by several key characteristics, including decentralization, transparency, autonomy, security, and immutability [16,17]. These attributes raise the need for blockchain technology in a multitude of sectors [18,19]. For example, in the field of cyber-physical systems, authors discussed the use of this technology to ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of data transmission. They also discussed the concept of a consensus mechanism to ensure the security of these systems [20,21].
To overcome these challenges in decentralization, automation, security, and trust management of stakeholders in healthcare, the combination of blockchain technology and multi-agent systems is a key solution. Blockchain technology provides just such a solution in the form of a distributed and secure registry that allows patients not only to have visibility over their data but also to control access to it. Therefore, via Blockchain technology, we ensure the interoperability of the platform used by the various health actors. Similarly, for the emergency service, it can access patient data without the need to request it from the patient. The MAS allows for automating the interactions between the agents forming a fully decentralized system. Indeed, the MAS consolidates the efficiency and confidence of human/machine or machine/machine communication. It also ensures the security of the agents. The authors [22,23] have exploited the multi-agent system and proposed a trust management system between agents by using the technique of identification of agents via private and public keys. Based on smart contracts, the proposed solution consists in exploiting RBAC and ABAC access control techniques. This solution removes the central authority (CA) to reduce maintenance costs and eliminate legacy threats from centralized systems.
Integrated with the health domain, we intend to track the electronic medical record using blockchain technology. The main objective is to ensure security and trust between the agents in the system by establishing automated communication without human intervention via smart contracts. To guarantee the security of patient data, the following criteria must be taken into consideration: authentication and access control.
The main contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
Proposing a blockchain-based platform for handling electronic patient records.
Exploiting access control techniques namely ABAC and RBAC to access our system and avoid any external intrusion.
Merging smart contracts and access control to guarantee the security and confidentiality of managed data.
The remainder of this document is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to the basic concept of blockchain technology and EMR. Section 3 presents the integration of blockchain in medical record management. The proposed system architecture is introduced in detail in Section 4. While Section 5 describes the simulation platform and the obtained results as well as the analysis and performance of the system. Finally, Section 6 concludes this paper and gives some hints for further research.

2. Basic Concept of Blockchain Technology and EMR

This section is dedicated to overview some basic notions related to blockchain technology as well as EMR systems and access control.

2.1. Blockchain Technology

The Bitcoin application introduced by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008 endorsed Blockchain. Blockchain is based on the concept of a decentralized ledger, which allows for more secure transactions. From 2009 to 2013, Blockchain was used in digital currency transactions and was referred to as Blockchain 1.0. Later, in 2015, the use of Smart Contracts introduced Blockchain 2.0, which provided better authentication and a tamperproof transaction process. The Ethereum platform introduces Blockchain 3.0 and the concept of DApps. We are now living with Blockchain 4.0, which is bringing forward its application in business and industries [10].
Blockchain features: Blockchain technology is characterized by many important features as illustrated in Figure 1. It is a decentralized P2P network in which data are stored in all nodes of the network. Thanks to a well-defined protocol, all nodes can manipulate, access and update transactions at the same time and without the need for an intermediary. These data are not all stored on the server of a central intermediary but are instead “distributed”. This property eliminates the problems associated with a centralized system. It also promotes anonymity, i.e., the identity of users is not broadcast to other users, except to the one participating in the transaction. All transactions in the blockchain are time-stamped, meaning that all transactions have a start time, an end time, and the length of time they have been active. Once recorded in the blockchain, it is impossible to delete or modify a transaction since there are multiple copies in different nodes of the network. Therefore, blocks can be extended and not changed. This gives the blockchain a high level of security and makes it more difficult to attack blocks of information.
Figure 1. Blockchain features.
Smart contracts: Nick Szabo, a computer scientist and cryptographer, pioneered the concept of smart contracts in the 1990s. The concept has recently been identified as being more useful in association with the progress of blockchain and DLTs. Smart contracts are digital forms of contracts that consist of a set of terms that must be met to carry out specific tasks, such as transferring assets or making a deposit. Because smart contracts are scripted and fully automated, they do not require any counterparties. The concept is supposed to follow a simple logic and to be verified by cryptographic methods.
Consensus mechanism: Blockchain consensus protocols create a system of irrefutable agreement between different parties within a distributed network while preventing malicious exploitation of the system. They allow the blockchain to be updated while ensuring that every block on the chain is valid. They also prevent a single entity from controlling the entire network, thus guaranteeing its decentralization. There are several mechanisms for validating a block. For example, proof of work (PoW), proof of stake (PoS), practical byzantine fault tolerance (PBFT), proof of authority (PoA) and proof of elapsed time (PoET).

2.2. Multi-Agents’ System

A MAS is a self-contained distributed system comprised of multiple agents capable of carrying out their functions. Each agent in the system is an independent computational entity with one or more objectives, knowledge, and skills. To address challenges, the agents collaborate. MAS is also commonly used in the construction of distributed systems, with the goal of achieving high system dependability, availability, openness, resource sharing, and reusability [18].

2.3. Access Control

Access control is a technique for controlling user access to resources. It indicates the actions to be performed by each user and restrict illegal access to information. Authentication, identification, and authorization are the basis of the access control model. Among the most used types of access control is Discretionary Access Control (DAC), Attribute Based Access Control (ABAC), Role Based Access Control (RBAC) and Mandatory Access Control (MAC) [22].
Discretionary Access Control: In DAC, the owner of a resource decides how it can be shared. He can choose to give read or write access to other users.
Attribute Based Access Control: ABAC is a logical access control paradigm that regulates object access by assessing some stated control rule or policy against subject, object, action, and environment properties. The primary idea behind ABAC is to enable all authorization based on the subject’s characteristics rather than assigning permissions directly between subjects and objects.
Role Based Access Control: RBAC is called also non-discretionary access control. In this type, users are assigned a role and the role dictates access to a resource. It is, in fact, a set of rules that determines how subjects and objects interact.
Mandatory Access Control: Access rights are governed by a vital force that is subject to varying levels of security. The needed authorization control includes distributing representations to structural resources as well as the privacy feature or operating framework. Access to assured assets is restricted to clients or devices that have the basic data exceptional status.

2.4. EMR Systems

According to the committee recommendation of 6.2.2019 on a European Electronic Health Record exchange format, EMR is defined as a patient file that contains the following data: patient records, electronic prescription/electronic dispensing, laboratory results, medical imaging and related reports, and hospital discharge reports [23]. Today’s medical record systems are extremely vulnerable to data degradation, forgery, and loss because they are stored in various healthcare facilities and manipulated in a centralized way. In this case, many hospitals keep the data of their patients in a database through an agent. However, even in this case, the patient must bring his file with him if he changes doctor or the hospital. This is an unreliable way to manage such sensitive information [24].

4. Proposed System

The proposed system, SEMRAchain, is a platform allowing the exchange and sharing of patient medical records. This solution combines blockchain technology and multi-agent systems. To ensure the security of the data manipulated by the different stakeholders, access control (ABAC and RBAC) as well as smart contracts are exploited. The system must also meet certain requirements. In the blockchain-based healthcare system, the identity of individuals with the right to participate in the electronic medical record management process must be verified. Indeed, participants must authenticate themselves to have access to resources. Additionally, each participant has a predefined role in the processing of the patient’s file. In fact, they have access only to the resources necessary to accomplish their tasks. The data exchanged in healthcare are large and the scale of the network evolves each time a user is added, so scalability must be considered. For all users to benefit from the required medical data service, an electronic medical record system should include a flexible user interface that allows for the efficient and simplified use of resources. The application must meet the CIA triad (confidentiality, integrity, availability). Patient data require protection from viewing or other unauthorized access or modification to ensure reliability and accuracy. It is also available to authorized users who need it.
Various agents, as shown in Figure 2, have access to patient data. These data are aggregated and stored on the blockchain. The consultations as well as the update of the EMR are controlled by a smart contract. Each agent must be authenticated to be able to manipulate, in a limited time, the information that suits them. After examining a patient, the doctor agent writes prescriptions and adds scans and test results which are all recorded as operations. The pharmacy dispenses medications and records the transaction on the blockchain. The same goes for analyses from the laboratory. Via smart contracts, patients use electronic tokens for the payment of online consultations or when purchasing medication.
Figure 2. Smart healthcare services.

4.1. Proposed System Model

In the EMR system and as shown in Figure 3, several agents exchange information between them. They access a web application to provide or request health information. To access it, they must be authenticated. Depending on the type of user, the smart contract adds the automatic and secure aspect of this transfer. Data that are saved on the blockchain are then displayed on the appropriate interface. Therefore, we try to assign each user an access role thanks to the transparency and immutability of the blockchain to maintain the security of the patient’s data against attacks.
Figure 3. Smart healthcare services based on blockchain technology.
The architecture of the system is composed of two main parts: MAS allows communication between agents and a public blockchain network (BC) allows storing all transactions and smart contracts. The proposed model is based on three main concepts:
Smart contract: Smart contracts are the most important component of any blockchain framework as they fulfill basic functions. For the design of our framework, the first step is the deployment of different smart contracts either for system stakeholder enrollment or for authentication to manipulate and check EMR.
Authentication: Access to the system requires user authentication through Ethereum addresses for each agent. After authentication, the patient and healthcare specialist agent can consult and communicate with each other.
Access control: Access control is a process that allows only authorized entities to manage information and control this information. In our case, to access and update the patient’s medical data, the healthcare professional agent sends an access request via the smart contract that verifies the identity and rights of the requester and then authorizes him to send a request to the appropriate service.

4.2. System Model Process

The communication process between our system’s agents is divided into four stages: Agent registration, Agent enrollment, Agent authentication, and EMR management. These steps are explained, respectively, in Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6.
Figure 4. Agent registration.
Figure 5. Agent enrollment.
Figure 6. EMR management Based RBAC and ABAC.
Agent registration: In this step, the system administrator assigns each agent an account and a role. This designation is recorded in a hash table via a smart contract. The added role is then used when adding an agent or in the handling of transactions in the communication process. However, the deployment of different smart contracts required by our system was the object of this step.
Agent enrollment: The registration step consists of adding the agents to the system. After verifying the account address, the agent information can be added to the Agent_DB through a smart contract. In this phase, the smart contract saves the characteristics or attributes of each agent, especially the identifier and account. Upon successful registration, agents are allowed to join the blockchain.
Agent authentication: To use our system, registered agents authenticate themselves. Two types of access control are used: Role-Based Access Control and Attribute-Based Access Control. The use of the “msg. sender” variable of the OpenZeppelin library allows for identifying and validating the agent’s address. On the other hand, during EMR management, it is necessary to control access to patient data.
EMR management: to access and update the patient’s medical data, the healthcare professional agent sends an access request via the smart contract that verifies the identity and rights of the requester and then authorizes them to send a request to the appropriate service.

5. Simulation and Results

In this section, simulation results for cost consumption are discussed. Ethereum blockchain is used in this system; for that, the cost of smart contracts and their functions are calculated in terms of gas usage. Furthermore, the ether value is also checked for each gas unit. Further sections describe the simulation environment and the cost consumption of each smart contract and its functions.

5.1. Simulations Setting

To validate our system, all the simulations are performed on Intel Core i5, CPU 2.60 GHz with 8 GB RAM, running on Windows 10. Furthermore, we used the Ethereum blockchain. Indeed, Ethereum can manage the implementation of smart contracts written in solidity language. Each agent has an account in the Ethereum blockchain. To access this account, we use the web3.js library through an HTTP connection in JSON RPC format. The Truffle development environment is used to compile and migrate smart contracts to the blockchain. Metamask is used to implement Ethereum wallet functions that allow participants to control the Ethereum account information and make transactions. Any changes sent to the transactions are recorded on the blockchain network.

5.2. EMR Smart Contract Deployment

We use a personal blockchain, Ganache, to implement our smart contracts. It enables the deployment of smart contracts, the development of Dapp, and the execution of tests. Ganache offers ten Ethereum accounts, each with a balance of 100 ether, as well as a graphical interface for examining everything that happens on this network.
Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9 and Figure 10 depict the compilation and migration of smart contracts to the blockchain ganache. Four smart contracts are compiled and deployed in the “development” blockchain: EMR.sol, Registration.sol, Auth.sol and Migration.sol. The entire cost of this transaction, as shown by the migration result, is 0.01751596 ether, which is the equivalent of £ 58.61. This conversion was conducted on 28 March 2022. Following the transfer of our smart contract, we will build a local virtual server holding the client-side application using the truffle framework. To join our blockchain network, we need to connect to our Metamask portfolio.
Figure 7. Compilation.
Figure 8. Migrate.
Figure 9. EMR smart contract deployment.
Figure 10. Registration smart contract deployment.

5.3. Cost Consumption

In the Ethereum blockchain, the proposed platform is evaluated through the cost consumed by the smart contracts. These are the units of gas to execute a transaction and smart contract functions. Otherwise, it is the transaction cost as well as the execution cost. The transaction cost is the fee for transferring the smart contract code to the Ethereum blockchain. It is limited by the thickness of the smart contract. The smart contract’s size is determined by the basic operations it performs. While the execution cost is the cost of storing global variables and smart contract method calls. It is also affected by the calculation operations performed during transaction execution.
To calculate the gas fees for each transaction in our system, we apply the following equation:
Transaction Fee = gasUsed × gasPrice
where gasUsed is defined depending on the storage and processing quantity for each transaction and gasPrice denotes the amount of gwei necessary for the transaction.
Let us take the example of the addUser function which allows assigning to each agent a role and account. As mentioned in Figure 11 the function gasUsed is 112,883 and gasPrice is 20 Gwei. So,
Transaction Fee = 112,883 × 20 = 2,257,660 Gwei = 0.00022 Ether
Figure 11. Registration smart contract deployed in Ganache.

5.4. Smart Contracts Cost

After deploying the smart contracts in our system and as shown in Figure 12, we calculated the cost of each smart contract. The results obtained are in Ether. The execution cost for the EMR management contract is 0.00890416 ETH while the cost for the registration contract is 0.0086118 ETH and for the agent enrollment contract is 0.008752 ETH. We notice that the cost of the EMR_management contract is higher than the other contracts. This contract contains the main functions of the system, such as adding patient analyses as well as the access control functions ABAC and RBAC. While the registration contract occupies less gas consumed since it just assigns a role to the agents in a table containing the accounts and roles. Agent_enrollment contract takes care of adding the relevant information to each agent.
Figure 12. Smart contracts cost.

5.5. Functions Cost

We have calculated the transaction costs of different smart contract functions. Note, that the transaction cost for reading data from the blockchain, such as the “getPatientData”, “getPrescription” and “getResults” functions, is null. Since mining is not required while getting messages from blocks, and no changes are required for the smart contract, this function does not incur any extra costs. The following Table 2 gives an overview of the cost of some transactions in our system.
Table 2. Gas price of some transactions of our proposed system.

7. Conclusions

When COVID-19 appeared, it was necessary for doctors to turn to telemedicine to limit the transmission of the epidemic. However, this scenario promotes the risk of disclosure of patient data. Thus, blockchain technology is combined with multi-agent systems and access control in this study to solve this problem. The primary goals of this system are trust and security. To ensure that these features are implemented, various smart contacts are strategically placed. The proposed framework includes multiple access control smart contracts. These smart contracts go through three stages, validation of access request, policy check, and misconduct check. To evaluate the proposed system, smart contract costs and function costs are calculated. The entire cost of this transaction is 0.01751596 ether which is the equivalent of £ 58.61. The cost of each smart contract is, respectively, as follows: the execution cost for the EMR management contract is 0.00890416 ETH while the cost for the registration contract is 0.0086118 ETH and for the agent enrolment contract it is 0.008752 ETH. A deep analysis of related work was performed according to five categories of criteria. The first one concerns blockchain technology. The second category of criteria is relative to access control. The third and fourth criterium are, respectively, security and integrity. The last one represents a multi-agent system based. The results obtained show that the developed platform is characterized by security, availability, and privacy.
In future work, we will extend our system to design a platform consisting of three important parts. This platform contains a list of hospitals, EMRs and a network of connected ambulances. The three parts are linked together by a blockchain network. This extension allows the road user to find the nearest medical service and the nearest ambulance to their location in case of an accident.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, writing—original draft, results analysis, H.M.; data collection, data analysis, writing—review and editing, results analysis, M.A.; methodology, writing—review and editing, design and presentation, references, A.K.; methodology, writing—review and editing, A.A.-R.; methodology, writing—review and editing, B.O.S.; methodology, writing—review and editing, S.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was financially supported by Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2022R235), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University Researchers Supporting Project number (PNURSP2022R235), Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Goyal, S.; Sharma, N.; Bhushan, B.; Shankar, A.; Sagayam, M. IoT Enabled Technology in Secured Healthcare: Applications, Challenges and Future Directions. In Cognitive Internet of Medical Things for Smart Healthcare. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control; Hassanien, A.E., Khamparia, A., Gupta, D., Shankar, K., Slowik, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mhamdi, H.; Soufiene, B.O.; Zouinkhi, A.; Ali, O.; Sakli, H. Trust-Based Smart Contract for Automated Agent to Agent Communication. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 5136865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ben Othman, S.; Almalki, F.A.; Chakraborty, C.; Sakli, H. Privacy-preserving aware data aggregation for IoT-based healthcare with green computing technologies. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2022, 101, 108025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bharadwaj, H.K.; Agarwal, A.; Chamola, V.; Lakkaniga, N.R.; Hassija, V.; Guizani, M.; Sikdar, B. A Review on the Role of Machine Learning in Enabling IoT Based Healthcare Applications. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 38859–38890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gope, P.; Millwood, O.; Sikdar, B. A Scalable Protocol Level Approach to Prevent Machine Learning Attacks on PUF-based Authentication Mechanisms for Internet-of-Medical-Things. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2021, 18, 1971–1980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ahmed, I.; Jeon, G.; Piccialli, F. A Deep-Learning-Based Smart Healthcare System for Patient’s Discomfort Detection at the Edge of Internet of Things. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 8, 10318–10326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Almalki, F.A.; Soufiene, B.O. EPPDA: An Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Data Aggregation Scheme with Authentication and Authorization for IoT-Based Healthcare Applications. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2021, 2021, 5594159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Almalki, F.A.; Ben Othman, S.; Almalki, F.A.; Sakli, H. EERP-DPM: Energy Efficient Routing Protocol Using Dual Prediction Model for Healthcare Using IoT. J. Health Eng. 2021, 2021, 9988038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Soufiene, B.O.; Bahattab, A.A.; Trad, A.; Youssef, H. PEERP: An Priority-Based Energy-Efficient Routing Protocol for Reliable Data Transmission in Healthcare using the IoT. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 175, 373–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Raoof, S.S.; Durai, M.A.S. A Comprehensive Review on Smart Health Care: Applications, Paradigms, and Challenges with Case Studies. Contrast Media Mol. Imaging 2022, 2022, 4822235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Y.; Nazir, S.; Shafiq, M. An Overview on Analyzing Deep Learning and Transfer Learning Approaches for Health Monitoring. Comput. Math. Methods Med. 2021, 2021, 5552743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. FKraemer, F.A.; Braten, A.E.; Tamkittikhun, N.; Palma, D. Fog Computing in Healthcare–A Review and Discussion. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 9206–9222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Awaisi, K.S.; Hussain, S.; Ahmed, M.; Khan, A.A.; Ahmed, G. Leveraging IoT and Fog Computing in Healthcare Systems. IEEE Internet Things Mag. 2020, 3, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ijaz, M.; Li, G.; Lin, L.; Cheikhrouhou, O.; Hamam, H.; Noor, A. Integration and Applications of Fog Computing and Cloud Computing Based on the Internet of Things for Provision of Healthcare Services at Home. Electronics 2021, 10, 1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nakamoto, S. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. 2008. Available online: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf (accessed on 25 August 2022).
  16. Tasca, P.; Tessone, C.J. A Taxonomy of Blockchain Technologies: Principles of Identification and Classification. Ledger 2019, 4, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kaur, M.; Khan, M.Z.; Gupta, S.; Noorwali, A.; Chakraborty, C.; Pani, S.K. MBCP: Performance Analysis of Large Scale Mainstream Blockchain Consensus Protocols. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 80931–80944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mhamdi, H.; Zouinkhi, A.; Sakli, H. Multi-agents’ system of vehicle services based on Blockchain. In Proceedings of the 2020 20th International Conference on Sciences and Techniques of Automatic Control and Computer Engineering (STA), Monastir, Tunisia, 20–22 December 2020; pp. 291–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mhamdi, H.; Zouinkhi, A.; Sakli, H. Smart contracts for decentralized vehicle services. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC), Harbin, China, 28 June–2 July 2021; pp. 1846–1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bhattacharjya, A.; Wisniewski, R.; Nidumolu, V. A holistic research on major Blockchain’s Consensus Protocols’ working mechanisms with security aspects of CPS. Electronics 2022, 11, 2760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bhattacharjya, A. A holistic study on use of Blockchain technology in CPS and IoT architectures with focus on maintaining CIA triad of data communication. Int. J. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 2022, 32, 403–413. [Google Scholar]
  22. Cho, C.; Seong, Y.; Won, Y. Mandatory Access Control Method for Windows Embedded OS Security. Electronics 2021, 10, 2478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Recommendation on a European Electronic Health Record Exchange Format. Available online: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/fr/node/2138 (accessed on 31 July 2022).
  24. Nishi, F.K.; Shams-E-Mofiz, M.; Khan, M.M.; Alsufyani, A.; Bourouis, S.; Gupta, P.; Saini, D.K. Electronic Healthcare Data Record Security Using Blockchain and Smart Contract. J. Sensors 2022, 2022, 7299185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mhamdi, H.; Othman, S.B.; Zouinkhi, A.; Sakli, H. Blockchain Technology in Healthcare: Use Cases Study. In Intelligent Healthcare; Chakraborty, C., Khosravi, M.R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mhamdi, H.; Othman, S.B.; Zouinkhi, A.; Almalki, F.A.; Sakli, H. Blockchain Technology in Healthcare: A Systematic Review. In Blockchain Technology in Healthcare Applications: Social, Economic, and Technological Implications, 1st ed.; Bhushan, B., Rakesh, N., Farhaoui, Y., Astya, P.N., Unhelkar, B., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kazmi HS, Z.; Nazeer, F.; Mubarak, S.; Hameed, S.; Basharat, A.; Javaid, N. Trusted Remote Patient Monitoring Using Blockchain-Based Smart Contracts; BWCCA 2019, LNNS 97; Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020L: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 765–776. [Google Scholar]
  28. Shen, B.; Guo, J.; Yang, Y. MedChain: Efficient Healthcare Data Sharing via Blockchain. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Casado-Vara, R.; Briones, A.G.; Prieto, J.; Rodríguez, J.C. Smart Contract for Monitoring and Control of Logistics Activities: Pharmaceutical Utilities Case Study. In Chapter in Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  30. Saini, A.; Zhu, Q.; Singh, N.; Xiang, Y.; Gao, L.; Zhang, Y. A Smart-Contract-Based Access Control Framework for Cloud Smart Healthcare System. IEEE Internet Things J. 2020, 8, 5914–5925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jabbar, R.; Fetais, N.; Krichen, M.; Barkaoui, K. Blockchain technology for healthcare: Enhancing shared electronic health record interoperability and integrity. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Informatics, IoT, and Enabling Technologies (ICIoT), Doha, Qatar, 2–5 February 2020; pp. 310–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Raj, R.; Rai, N.; Agarwal, S. Anticounterfeiting in pharmaceutical supply chainby establishing proof of ownership. In Proceedings of the TENCON 2019–2019 IEEE Region 10 Conference (TENCON), Kochi, India, 17–20 October 2019; pp. 1572–1577. [Google Scholar]
  33. Jamil, F.; Ahmad, S.; Iqbal, N.; Kim, D. Towards a remote monitoring of patient vital signs based on iot-based blockchain integrity management platforms in smart hospitals. Sensors 2020, 20, 2195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Ahmad, R.S.; Salah, K.; Jayaraman, R.; Yaqoob, I.; Ellahham, S.; Omar, M. The role of blockchain technology in telehealth and telemedicine. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2021, 148, 104399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Srivastava, G.; Parizi, R.M.; Dehghantanha, A.; Choo, K.K.R. Data Sharing and Privacy for Patient IoT Devices Using Blockchain. In Smart City and Informatization. iSCI 2019. Communications in Computer and Information Science; Wang, G., El Saddik, A., Lai, X., Martinez Perez, G., Choo, K.K., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; Volume 1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wang, J.; Han, K.; Alexandridis, A.; Chen, Z.; Zilic, Z.; Pang, Y.; Jeon, G.; Piccialli, F. A blockchain-based eHealthcare system interoperating with WBANs. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 110, 675–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zhuang, Y.; Sheets, L.R.; Shae, Z.; Chen, Y.W.; Tsai, J.J.P.; Shyu, C.R. Applying Blockchain Technology to Enhance Clinical Trial Recruitment. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2020, 2019, 1276–1285. [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhuang, Y.; Sheets, L.; Shae, Z.; Tsai, J.J.P.; Shyu, C.-R. Applying Blockchain Technology for Health Information Exchange and Persistent Monitoring for Clinical Trials. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. AMIA Symp. 2018, 2018, 1167–1175. [Google Scholar]
  39. Bhattacharjya, A.; Kozdrój, K.; Bazydło, G.; Wisniewski, R. Trusted and Secure Blockchain-Based Architecture for Internet-of-Medical-Things. Electronics 2022, 11, 2560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.