Authors:
Hari Prasad Chandika,Kontham Raja Kumar,DOI NO:
https://doi.org/10.26782/jmcms.2025.01.00003Keywords:
Average Latency,Blockchain Security,Data Encryption,Decryption Times,ESMIoTHD,Healthcare Data Privacy,IoT-based Healthcare,Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR),Abstract
The primary focus of the study, entitled “Enhanced Blockchain Security and Management for IoT-Based Healthcare Data: A Robust Framework for Trust and Integrity”, was to determine the performance of four encryption algorithms, SADBTM, ECSBFQL, HBDMS, and ESMIoTHD, regarding their encryption and decryption times, average latency, and packet delivery ratio on different data sizes. It can be seen that employing blockchain security and management increases the security of IoT-based healthcare data. Consequently, this ensures that healthcare data can be linked to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability that remains central in today’s digitally interconnected world. Since the blockchain is a decentralized medical data-sharing tool that is impossible to alter, it is more secure due to guaranteed no potential unauthorized access to the data. Additionally, as indicated in the results during the performance evaluation of the blockchain systems in IoT healthcare networks, it was possible to improve patient data privacy, make data access easier, and ensure the trustworthiness of the healthcare systems. For instance, according to the study’s results, the encryption and decryption times had been computed in terms of milliseconds. The range of the data size was from 10 kilobytes to 100 kilobytes. When 100 data points had been encrypted, the ESMIoTHD had the lowest encryption time, namely, 12363 m, as compared to its encryption peers which include 13232 m, 13854 m, and 14376 m SADBTM, ECSBFQL, and HBDMS, respectively. Conversely, the results regarding the decryption times revealed a similar pattern to the encryption times. That is there was no significant deviation between the three encryption algorithms with the values being 13232 m, 13854 m, and 14376 m; however, ESMIoTHD had a decryption time of 13232 m. The average latency had been calculated in terms of milliseconds (m), whereby the results showed that ESMIoTHD has equivalent performance and its average latency was closest to its peers, such as 808 m for 100 data points. The packet delivery ratio had been computed in terms of percentages. Both the encryption and decryption algorithms had a similar pattern as they had been assessed based on the three results. However, the results show that ESMIoTHD had the highest PDR values in all data sizes, for example, the PDR was 98.896% for a 100 kb data size, which was far much higher than its peers. Based on the results of ESMIoTHD being the most efficient and reliable, particularly in terms of high throughput and low latency, these outcomes show that it is one of the leading encryption algorithms.Refference:
I. Agarwal, S., and Pal, R. “HierChain: A Hierarchical Blockchain-Based Framework for Secure Health Data Management.” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 15, no. 6, 2019, pp. 3286–3295. 10.1109/TII.2019.2904286.
II. Agbo, C. C., et al. “Blockchain Technology in Healthcare: A Systematic Review.” Healthcare, vol. 7, no. 2, 2019. 10.3390/healthcare7020056.
III. Boulos, M. N. K., et al. “How Blockchain Technology Can Transform the Healthcare Sector.” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 20, no. 10, 2018. 10.2196/10326.
IV. Engelhardt, M. A. “Hitching Healthcare to the Blockchain: The Promise and the Pitfalls.” Applied Clinical Informatics, vol. 8, no. 3, 2017, pp. 452–465. 10.4338/ACI-2017-02-RA-0021.
V. Esposito, C., et al. “Blockchain: A Panacea for Healthcare Cloud-Based Data Security and Privacy?” IEEE Cloud Computing, vol. 5, no. 1, 2018, pp. 31–37. 10.1109/MCC.2018.011791712.
VI. Gajendran, T., Saravanan, S., and Thangavel, M. “Integrated Elliptic Crypt with Secured Blockchain for Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning in IoMT.” IEEE Access, vol. 8, 2020, pp. 214832–214841. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3040148.
VII. Hölbl, M., et al. “A Systematic Review of the Use of Blockchain in Healthcare.” Symmetry, vol. 10, no. 10, 2018. 10.3390/sym10100470.
VIII. Kang, J., Yu, R., Huang, X., Maharjan, S., Zhang, Y., and Hossain, E. “Blockchain for Secure and Efficient Data Sharing in Healthcare: A Cross-Chain Empowered Federated Learning Framework.” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 16, no. 10, 2020, pp. 6309–6318. 10.1109/TII.2020.2971046.
IX. Kuo, T. T., et al. “Blockchain Distributed Ledger Technologies for Biomedical and Healthcare Applications.” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, vol. 24, no. 6, 2017, pp. 1211–1220. 10.1093/jamia/ocx068.
X. Li, J., Zhou, Y., and Wang, H. “Hybrid Blockchain Models for Scalable and Secure Healthcare Applications.” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 18, no. 2, 2022, pp. 1338–1347. 10.1109/TII.2021.3118395.
XI. Patel, D., and Kumar, V. “Lightweight Cryptographic Algorithms for IoT Healthcare Networks: Enhancing Efficiency and Security.” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, 2022, pp. 2317–2327. 10.1109/JIOT.2021.3103901.
XII. Qathrady, M., Selvaraj, M., and Prabu, P. “A Dynamic Blockchain-Based Trust Management Model for Secure IoMT Networks.” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, 2020, pp. 3054–3063. 10.1109/JIOT.2020.2968526.
XIII. Radanović, I., and Likić, R. “Opportunities for Use of Blockchain Technology in Medicine.” Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, vol. 16, no. 5, 2018, pp. 583–590. 10.1007/s40258-018-0412-8.
XIV. Roehrs, A., et al. “Personal Health Records: A Systematic Literature Review.” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 19, no. 1, 2017. doi:10.2196/jmir.5876.
XV. Sharma, P., Gupta, R., and Verma, S. “Blockchain-Integrated Federated Learning System for Secure EHR Sharing During COVID-19 Pandemic.” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 23, no. 5, 2021. 10.2196/24243.
XVI. Shuaib, M., et al. “Applications of Blockchain in Healthcare: Current Landscape and Challenges.” Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, vol. 45, no. 4, 2020, pp. 3411–3431. 10.1007/s13369-020-04525-5.
XVII. Singh, A., Rao, K., and Mehta, N. “AI-Enhanced Blockchain Framework for Real-Time Data Analytics in IoT Healthcare Systems.” IEEE Access, vol. 11, 2023, pp. 3014–3025. 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3247038.
XVIII. Wang, H., Song, Y., and Chen, X. “A Data Verifiable Access Control System for EHR Sharing Using Blockchain.” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 23, no. 5, 2021. 10.2196/24521.
XIX. Zhuang, Y., et al. “Blockchain for IoT-Based Healthcare: The State-of-the-Art, Challenges, and Future Directions.” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 6, no. 5, 2019, pp. 7828–7855. 10.1109/JIOT.2019.2922038.