Q: I am a certified case manager working in an acute care hospital. As part of our job requirements, when working in the emergency room (ER), we are asked to problem solve throughout the day. We often get requests for information on patients seen in the ER who have since been discharged.
Q: Is it permissible to take pictures of patients for identification purposes as a part of the registration process? Do the patients need to sign a consent form before their picture can be taken?
A: It is permissible to take pictures of patients for identification purposes if the patient agrees to it. Since the Privacy Rule considers full-face photographs to be a patient identifier, it is a good practice to get the patient's written consent to take a photograph and file it with the patient's electronic record. The patient should be allowed to opt out of the photograph if he or she chooses.
Editor's note
Brandt is a healthcare consultant specializing in healthcare regulatory compliance and operations improvement. She is also an advisory board member for BOH. This information does not constitute legal advice. Consult legal counsel for answers to specific privacy and security questions. Opinions expressed are those of the author and do not represent HCPro or ACDIS. Email your HIPAA questions to Associate Editor Nicole Votta at nvotta@hcpro.com.
As Phase 2 of the HIPAA audit program begins, covered entities (CE) and business associates (BA) will be watching their email for an audit letter from OCR. Of those chosen for audit, most will be selected for a desk audit. They'll have 10 days after receipt of the email to gather requested documents for OCR's auditors.
But how will CEs and BAs know they are collecting the right information? A careful reading of the updated Phase 2 audit protocol (www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/compliance-enforcement/audit/protocol/index.html) will help guide CEs and BAs. But if the protocol isn't read carefully, and in full, important documents could easily be left out, leading to inaccurate audit reports and even a visit from OCR's investigators.
The Phase 2 audit protocol expands the Phase 1 compliance areas to reflect changes made by the 2013 HIPAA omnibus final rule. The updated audit protocol also includes information for BAs, which were not audited during Phase 1 but will be in the current round of audits. The protocol contains a description of the audit areas, general instructions and definitions, and a keyword-searchable table.
Phase 2 audits will be conducted in three rounds. The first two rounds will consist of desk audits of specific audit targets, while the third round will be comprehensive audits. Round one audits will target CEs and round two audits will target BAs.
Editor's note: This is part one of a series about medical identity theft. Look for part two in an upcoming issue of BOH.
Privacy and security officers are sitting on a hoard of valuable data: medical identity information. Social Security numbers. Medicare, Medicaid, and other insurer numbers. Credit card and bank account information. This data can fetch a high price on the black market, and medical identity theft costs patients, providers, and insurers millions of dollars a year. The lure of medical identity information makes healthcare organizations an appealing target for criminals, from large operations launching sophisticated hacking schemes to smaller groups running tried and true fraud scams.
A 2015 study conducted by the Ponemon Institute and sponsored by the Medical Identity Fraud Alliance (MIFA), the Fifth Annual Study on Medical Identity Theft, found that medical identity fraud nearly doubled between 2010 and 2014. More than 2.3 million adults were victims of medical identity theft and fraud in 2014 alone. The average cost per victim was $13,500 and the combined out-of-pocket cost was approximately $20 billion. But the financial impact is only the tip of the iceberg. Medical identity theft can result in physical harm to a patient if the medical record is altered to include another person's information such as allergies, disease status, or blood type.
Healthcare organizations often absorb some of the costs, and if the stolen PHI was used to commit Medicare or Medicaid fraud, they could be investigated by the OIG.
The stakes are high but by raising awareness and championing education and robust security programs, privacy and security officers can help their organizations stay one step ahead of criminals.
Information systems activity review is a fancy way of saying you need to monitor your network and your applications including who is looking at and manipulating your patient information. That can be an expensive, or even almost impossible, proposition when it comes to regular monitoring of access to patient information stored in electronic health records (EHR). Two of the well-known automated audit logging tools on the market, FairWarning and Iatric, are well outside the budget for small- to medium-sized covered entities (CE). The manual option, checking audit logs by hand, is slow and ineffective.
The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, part of the larger American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, was created to encourage and regulate the use of technology in healthcare. HITECH brought meaningful use, an incentive plan designed to increase the use of certified electronic medical records, and amendments to the Security Rule of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Although some provisions of HITECH have not been implemented (e.g., the more robust three-year accounting of disclosures for electronic protected health information [PHI]), the following is a list of the major topics that have been amended with the adoption of HITECH:
A breach of PHI is the last thing a privacy or security officer wants but, large or small, breaches can happen. The best-laid defenses can be undermined by simple human error or a cyber-criminal hacking on the cutting edge of technology. When that happens, you need a security incident response plan.
Disaster plan
A formal security incident response plan should be developed and maintained similar to a data center disaster response plan, Kate Borten, CISSP, CISM, HCISPP, founder of The Marblehead Group, Marblehead, Massachusetts, says. IT departments should be accustomed to disaster recovery plans that guide the department's response to any disaster (e.g., fire, flood, earthquake) that affects computer systems. Security incident response plans can be seen as comparable and equally important.
When a breach is identified, the first step should be to stop the bleeding. Take steps to prevent a recurrence or limit the damage. This could be especially important for security breaches that involve hacking or PHI that was accidentally made accessible to the public on a website or cloud service. In such a situation, it would be prudent to shut down affected websites, portals, or remove access to data repositories, according to Frank Ruelas, MBA, principal of HIPAA College in Casa Grande, Arizona.
Follow a plan from the start to ensure that risks are mitigated quickly. The plan should include appropriate steps to take depending on the type of security incident, who should be part of the incident response team, and how information about the breach should be communicated within the organization, according to Chris Apgar, CISSP, president of Apgar and Associates in Portland, Oregon. Having a detailed plan that lists members of the incident response team means more time can be spent addressing the breach than asking questions about who should be involved.
A security incident response plan will also help an organization determine what level of action it needs to take. "There will be some incidents, including breaches, where it's not necessary to pull together the whole team and go through every step in the plan," Apgar says. "For example, if a patient notifies you that she received another patient's EOB [explanation of benefits], it may not be necessary to call everyone together."
In that example, Apgar says, because the organization already knows who was impacted by the breach, the response is simply a matter of following the breach notification steps set by HIPAA and any applicable state laws.
Creating and conducting an organizationwide risk analysis: Part 1
Editor's note: This is part one of a series about implementing organizationwide risk analyses. Look for part two in an upcoming issue of BOH.
OCR's breach settlements, corrective action plans (CAP), and penalties often take organizations to task for not completing a regular organizationwide risk analysis, yet it's all too easy for this important job to fall by the wayside. A lack of resources and competing demands within an organization can push the risk analysis to the bottom of the list of priorities. But this leaves an organization vulnerable to threats it will only see in hindsight. It also often leads to scrutiny from OCR and the public.
Creating secure passwords, guest wireless networks, and emailing PHI
by Chris Apgar, CISSP
Q: I work at a doctor's office. If a patient calls and asks to have a copy of his or her medical records sent to his or her home address, are we required to obtain any additional verification beyond checking that the address matches the one we have on file? We have a patient portal where most of our patients are able to access their records, but some still prefer to have copies sent to them.
A: As with any request for PHI from an external party, whether it be the patient or someone else, proper authentication is necessary. This means you need to ask questions such as what is the patient's birthdate before agreeing to send the patient a copy of his or her medical record or designated record set (DRS).
It's a good idea to ask the patient to make the request in writing. Per the HIPAA Privacy Rule, "The covered entity may require individuals to make requests for access in writing, provided that it informs individuals of such a requirement" (45 CFR §164.524(b)(1). This is not a "you shall." It's a "may" so in the end you may elect to not require the request be in writing. However, this might leave your practice vulnerable to the risk of someone impersonating the patient and requesting the record or the patient later complaining you sent a copy of his or her DRS without his or her permission.
If you require patients to make the request in writing, you can't make it too burdensome. For example, you can't require patients get the signed request notarized or walk the request in to the doctor's office. OCR recently published guidance regarding a patient's right to access his or her DRS (www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/access). It provides more detailed information about the dos and don'ts of meeting the HIPAA Privacy Rule requirement that patients are entitled to view or request a copy of their DRS.
Editor's note: Apgar is president of Apgar & Associates, LLC, in Portland, Oregon. He is also a BOH editorial advisory board member. This information does not constitute legal advice. Consult legal counsel for answers to specific privacy and security questions. Opinions expressed are that of the author and do not represent HCPro or ACDIS. Email your HIPAA questions to Associate Editor Nicole Votta at nvotta@hcpro.com.
