11/06/2025
November 6, 2025
An essential read from the New York Times today on the widespread use of continuous fetal monitoring and the growing role of AI in interpreting those data streams.
From a records and information management perspective, this isnāt only a clinical problem, itās a data governance problem.
Every second of electronic fetal monitoring generates protected health information (PHI) that must be stored, transmitted, and interpreted responsibly.
These data are often streamed to remote āmonitoring hubs,ā sometimes located dozens or hundreds of miles away, raising new questions about chain of custody, secondary data use, HIPAA compliance, data security, and record retention.
Historically, the paper monitor strips, sometimes annotated by nurses, were treated as short-term records, often destroyed within a 30 days despite their evidentiary and medico-legal value. The move to continuous digital monitoring expands this risk exponentially: terabytes of sensitive biometric data now pass through commercial platforms with unclear retention, access, security, and destruction policies.
If we reframe this issue as a records problem, all stakeholders, clinicians, patients, administrators, and vendors ā share exposure.
Hospitals that view continuous monitoring as a legal safeguard may, in fact, be multiplying their liability through insecure data flows, ambiguous custodianship, and noncompliance with retention laws.
Sometimes, the data meant to protect can itself become the risk.
,
---
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/health/electronic-fetal-monitoring-c-sections.html