There is a
confusion hidden in this thread that
revolves around the fact that FAX must be addressed by 'covered
entities' because the care of all PHI must be addressed but FAX
alone may not actually qualify a provider or payer as a 'covered
entity'. These are two
separate issues.
I would add that those entities who decide they are not technically covered by the regulations should give some consideration to the fact that the regulations are setting a standard of care with regard to PHI that patients will come to consider their right. State laws are giving individuals those rights as well. Federal legislation aside, even the smallest practitioner will be held to this standard. In a small paper-based office, personnel privacy awareness training, and policies for the handling of PHI are still essential . Privacy is on high center in healthcare as it is in commerce and financial markets. >From a consumer's perspective, the standard of care for personal information is expected to be the same across all domains.
I would add that those entities who decide they are not technically covered by the regulations should give some consideration to the fact that the regulations are setting a standard of care with regard to PHI that patients will come to consider their right. State laws are giving individuals those rights as well. Federal legislation aside, even the smallest practitioner will be held to this standard. In a small paper-based office, personnel privacy awareness training, and policies for the handling of PHI are still essential . Privacy is on high center in healthcare as it is in commerce and financial markets. >From a consumer's perspective, the standard of care for personal information is expected to be the same across all domains.
NOT being a covered entity allows that
entity to work without deadlines but there is no real advantage here. The
standard of care will apply to all
entities and is independent
of strict HIPAA
compliance.
Regards,
Pat
Patricia LareauLareau & AssociatesSecurity & Privacy ConsultingSan Luis Obispo, CA805.544.1138-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 12:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Covered entities
Preface: I am not a lawyer.
While I agree that faxes "ARE indisputably an electronic form of communication", I am not of the opinion that providers that submit UB-92s or HCFA-1500s via fax are conducting an electronic transaction as defined by HIPAA. Therefore, IMHO, a provider who sends only paper via standard mail and/or fax would not be a covered entity.
Alternate opinions are encouraged.
Cecil Bohannan
Principal Consultant
Keane, Inc.
**********************************************************************
To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=privacy
and enter your email address.
