Enabling Technologies for Fog Computing in Healthcare 4.0: Challenges and Future Implications

  • R. Hanumantharaju
  • D. Pradeep Kumar
  • B. J. SowmyaEmail author
  • G. M. Siddesh
  • K. N. Shreenath
  • K. G. Srinivasa
Part of the Signals and Communication Technology book series (SCT)


Fog computing is an architecture that uses edge devices to perform computation, storage, and communication locally and globally through routing over the internet. Healthcare industry has grown up from 1.0 to 4.0 generation. Healthcare 3.0 was a hospital centric, where long-lasting disease patients endured a great deal for their regular check-ups due to several visits to hospitals. To overcome some of the drawbacks of healthcare 3.0, we are discussing the healthcare 4.0 and its several challenges and future implications. The healthcare 4.0 track will be focusing on topics such as the use of technology and systems to improve patient safety, health outcomes, and the patient experience.

Fog computing offers few major benefits in comparison to the cloud computing approaches such as low latency, privacy, and resiliency against cloud inevitability. Fog computing adds an additional layer of computing power between the device and the cloud, keeping critical analytics closer to the device, thus reducing the amount of time it takes from request to reply. The aim of role of the Internet of Things in the field of healthcare is to make it easier for patients to stay connected to their providers and for their providers to provide their communities with transparent, value-based care. Fog computing can be the basic infrastructure for turning IoT from innovation to practice in healthcare. In this chapter, we are addressing the challenges of healthcare 4.0. The challenges are regarding the data (data collection and analysis), security and privacy and e-healthcare services and also we will discuss how the taxonomy of fog computing can be a better solution to healthcare 4.0.


Healthcare 4.0 Fog computing Internet of Things Health information management 


  1. 1.
    Silva, C. A., & de Aquino Junior, G. S. (2018). Fog computing in healthcare: A review. In Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on computers and communications (ISCC ‘18) (pp. vz).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farahani, B., Firouzi, F., Chang, V., et al. (2018). Towards fog-driven IoT ehealth: Promises and challenges of IoT in medicine and healthcare. Future Generation Computer Systems, 78, 659–676.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kharel, J., Reda, H. T., & Shin, S. Y. (2017). An architecture for smart health monitoring system based on fog computing. Journal of Communications, 12(4), 228–233.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kraemer, F. A., Braten, A. E., Tamkittikhun, N., & Palma, D. (2017). Fog computing in healthcare—A review and discussion. IEEE Access, 5, 9206–9222.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Azimi, I., Anzanpour, A., Rahmani, A. M., et al. (2016). Medical warning system based on internet of things using fog computing. In Proceedings of the international workshop on big data and information security, IWBIS ‘16 (pp. 19–24). Jakarta, Indonesia: IEEE.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bibani, O., Mouradian, C., Yangui, S., et al. (2016). A demo of IoT healthcare application provisioning in hybrid cloud/fog environment. In Proceedings of the eighth IEEE international conference on cloud computing technology and science, CloudCom ‘16 (pp. 472–475). Luxembourg: IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Confais, B., Lebre, A., & Parrein, B. (2017). An object store service for a fog/edge computing infrastructure based on IPFS and a scale-out NAS. In Proceedings of the first IEEE international conference on fog and edge computing, ICFEC ‘17 (pp. 41–50). Madrid, Spain: IEEE.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, X., & Wang, L. (2017). Exploring fog computing-based adaptive vehicular data scheduling policies through a compositional formal method – PEPA. IEEE Communications Letters, 21(4), 745–748.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alsafar, A. A., Pham, H. P., Hong, C.-S., Huh, E.-N., & Aazam, M. (2016). An architecture of IoT service delegation and resource allocation based on collaboration between fog and cloud computing. Mobile Information Systems, 2016, 6123234, 15p.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vora, J., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Rodrigues, J. P. C. (2017). FAAL: Fog computing-based patient monitoring system for ambient assisted living. In IEEE 19th international conference on e-Health Networking, applications and services (Healthcom-2017), 12–15 October 2017 (pp. 1–6). Dalian, China: Dalian University.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tanwar, S., Parekh, K., & Evans, R. (2019). Blockchain-based electronic healthcare record system for Healthcare 4.0 applications. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 50, 1–14.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bass, L., Clements, P., & Kazman, R. (2012). Software architecture in practice (3rd ed.). USA: Addison-Wesley Professional.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kumari, S., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., & Rodrigues, J. (2019). Fog computing for smart grid systems in 5G environment: Challenges and solutions. IEEE Wireless Communication Magazine, 26(3), 47–53.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paul, A., Pinjari, H., Hong, W.-H., Seo, H. C., & Rho, S. (2018). Fog computing-based IoT for health monitoring system. Hindawi Journal of Sensors, 2018, 1386470, 7p. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kumari, S., Tanwar, S., Tyagi, S., & Kumar, N. (2018). Fog computing for Healthcare 4.0 environment: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 72, 1–13.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghosh, A. M., & Grolinger K. (2019). Deep learning: Edge-cloud data analytics for IoT. In IEEE Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering.
  17. 17.
    Tanwar, S., Vora, J., Kanriya, S., Tyagi, S., Kumar, N., Sharma, V., et al. (2019). Human arthritis analysis in fog computing environment using Bayesian network classifier and thread protocol. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 9(1), 88–94.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Distefano, S., Bruneo, D., Longo, F., et al. (2017). Personalized health tracking with edge computing technologies. BioNanoScience, 7(2), 439–441.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rahmani, A. M., Gia, T. N., Negash, B., et al. (2018). Exploiting smart e-Health Gateways at the edge of healthcare internet-of-things: A fog computing approach. Future Generation Computer Systems, 78, 641–658.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh, D., Tripathi, G., Alberti, A. M., & Jara, A. (2017). Semantic edge computing and IoT architecture for military health services in battlefield. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE annual consumer communications and networking conference, CCNC ‘17 (pp. 185–190). NV, USA: IEEE.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Das, S., Ballav, M., & Karfa, S. (2015). Application of IoT in detecting health risks due to flickering artificial lights. In Proceedings of the international conference on advances in computing, communications and informatics, ICACCI ‘15 (pp. 2331–2334). Kochi, India: IEEE.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tarouco, L. M. R., Bertholdo, L. M., Granville, L. Z., et al. (2012). Internet of things in healthcare: Interoperatibility and security issues. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on communications, ICC ‘12 (pp. 6121–6125). Ottawa, ON, Canada: IEEE.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fafoutis, X., Tsimbalo, E., Mellios, E., et al. (2016). A residential maintenance-free long-term activity monitoring system for healthcare applications. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2016, 31. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing 15.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    World Health Organization. (2014). Global status report on non communicable diseases 2014. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    World Health Organization. (2017). New perspectives on global health spending for universal health coverage.
  26. 26.
    Deloitte. (2018). Global health care outlook: The evolution of smart health care.
  27. 27.
    Chakraborty, S., Bhowmick, S., Talaga, P., & Agrawal, D. P. (2016). Fog networks in healthcare application. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international conference on mobile ad hoc and sensor systems, MASS ‘16 (pp. 386–387). Brasilia, Brazil: IEEE.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maksimovic, M. (2017). Improving computing issues in internet of things driven e-Health Systems. In Proceedings of the international conference for young researchers in informatics, mathematics and engineering ‘17, CEUR workshop proceedings, Kaunas, Lithuania (pp. 14–17).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ali, S., & Ghazal, M. (2017). Real-time heart attack mobile detection service (RHAMDS): An IoT use case for software defined networks. In Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering, CCECE ‘17 (pp. 1–6). Windsor, ON, Canada: IEEE.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dupont, C., Giafreda, R., & Capra, L. (2017). Edge computing in IoT context: Horizontal and vertical Linux container migration. In Proceedings of the global internet of tings summit, GIoTS ‘17 (pp. 1–4). Geneva, Switzerland: IEEE.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Limaye, A., & Adegbija, T. (2017). A workload characterization for the internet of medical things (IoMT). In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society annual symposium on VLSI, ISVLSI ‘17 (pp. 302–307). Bochum, Germany: IEEE.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Masip-Bruin, X., Marin-Tordera, E., Gomez, A., et al. (2016). Will it be cloud or will it be fog? f2c, a novel flagship computing paradigm for highly demanding services. In Proceedings of the future technologies conference, FTC ‘16 (pp. 1129–1136). CA, USA: IEEE.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Masip-Bruin, X., Marin-Tordera, E., Alonso, A., & Garcia, J. (2016). Fog-to-cloud computing (F2C): The key technology enabler for dependable e-Health Services Deployment. In Proceedings of the Mediterranean ad hoc networking workshop (Med-Hoc-Net ‘16) (pp. 1–5). Vilanova i la Geltru, Spain: IEEE.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nandyala, C. S., & Kim, H.-K. (2016). From cloud to fog and IoT-based real-time U-healthcare monitoring for smart homes and hospitals. International Journal of Smart Home, 10(2), 187–196.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shi, Y., Ding, G., Wang, H., Roman, H. E., & Lu, S. (2015). The fog computing service for healthcare. In Proceedings of the second international symposium on future information and communication technologies for ubiquitous healthcare, Ubi-HealthTech ‘15 (pp. 1–5). Beijing, China: IEEE.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Aazam, M., & Huh, E.-N. (2015). E-HAMC: Leveraging fog computing for emergency alert service. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and communication, PerCom workshops ‘15 (pp. 518–523). MO, USA: IEEE.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Alsafar, A., Hung, P., & Huh, E.-N. (2017). An architecture of thin client-edge computing collaboration for data distribution and resource allocation in cloud. International Arab Journal of Information Technolog, 14(6), 842–850.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Khan, M. A., & Salah, K. (2018). IoT security: Review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges. Future Generation Computer Systems, 82, 395–411.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Swan, M. (2015). Blockchain: Blueprint for a new economy. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nakamoto, S. (2008). Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system.
  41. 41.
    Kishigami, J., Fujimura, S., Watanabe, H., Nakadaira, A., & Akutsu, A. (2015). The blockchain-based digital content distribution system. In Proceedings of the fifth IEEE international conference on big data and cloud computing, BDCloud ‘15 (pp. 187–190). Dalian, China: IEEE.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Samaniego, M., & Deters, R. (2016). Using blockchain to push sofware-defned IoT components onto edge hosts. In Proceedings of the international conference on big data and advanced wireless technologies, BDAW ‘16. New York: ACM. Article No. 58. 16 Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Xu, X., Weber, I., Staples, M., et al. (2017). A taxonomy of blockchain-based systems for architecture design. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on software Architecture (ICSA ‘17) (pp. 243–252). Gothenburg, Sweden: IEEE.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Atlam, H. F., Alenezi, A., Alassaf, M. O., & Wills, G. B. (2018). Blockchain with internet of things: benefits, challenges, and future directions. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications, 10(6), 40–48.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Samaniego, M., & Deters, R. (2017). Internet of smart things – IoST: Using blockchain and clips to make things autonomous. In Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Computing, ICCC ‘17 (pp. 9–16). Honolulu, HI, USA: IEEE.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Conoscenti, M., Vetro, A., & De Martin, J. C. (2016). Blockchain for the internet of things: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE/ACS international conference of computer systems and applications, AICCSA ‘16 (pp. 1–6). Agadir, Morocco: IEEE.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bohme, R., Christin, N., Edelman, B., & Moore, T. (2015). Bitcoin: Economics, technology, and governance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(2), 213–238.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Eyal, I., Gencer, A. E., Sirer, E. G., & Van Renesse, R. (2016) Bitcoin-Ng: A scalable blockchain protocol. In NSDI (pp. 45–59).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mettler, M. (2016). Blockchain technology in healthcare: The revolution starts here. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE international conference on e-Health Networking, applications and services, Healthcom ‘16 (pp. 1–3). Munich, Germany: IEEE.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Solove, D. (2008). Understanding privacy. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Clements, P., Bachmann, F., & Bass, L. (2010). Documenting software architectures: Views and beyond (2nd ed.). USA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Silva, C. A., Aquino, G. S., Jr., Melo, S. R. M., & Eg-dio, D. J. B. (2019). A fog computing-based architecture for medical records management. Hindawi Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2019, 1968960, 16p. Scholar
  53. 53.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Hanumantharaju
    • 1
  • D. Pradeep Kumar
    • 1
  • B. J. Sowmya
    • 1
    Email author
  • G. M. Siddesh
    • 2
  • K. N. Shreenath
    • 3
  • K. G. Srinivasa
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringRamaiah Institute of TechnologyBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Department of Information Science and EngineeringRamaiah Institute of TechnologyBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSiddaganga Institute of TechnologyTumkurIndia
  4. 4.National Institute of Technical Teachers TrainingChandigarhIndia

Personalised recommendations