With the same due respect, and I, too, mean it sincerely, the word
'unworkable' is very tempting to apply to the whole HIPAA scenario where
there is an interface with patients.
Take a look at what all you very bright and well-intentioned folks have been
posting over the past several months. This is a high level of confusion
among intelligent people. Now translate that to the undeniable fact that
half the people in the real world are below average intelligence (IQ 100)
and the world we physicians live and work in is populated by patients who,
through no fault of their own, exhibit an even higher percentage of room
temperature IQs.
Sure, we will get some of the people complying some of the time, but all of
the people all of the time is, in a word, unworkable.
To have us exposed to legal liability in this situation is, in another word,
unfair.
I believe we providers should demand an umbrella of some sort to protect us
from unwarranted, arbitrary, over-zealous enforcement of an essentially
unworkable set of regulations.
I'd love to hear other opinions on this - here if you think it warranted,
privately if you think otherwise.
FWDanby, MD [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin W. Tartaglia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WEDI SNIP Privacy Workgroup List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 12:17 PM
Subject: RE: HIPAA privacy and telephone
With all due respect, and I mean it sincerely.
Good idea for privacy Based on my many years of management
engineering and the application of voice, data and image
telecommunications
systems in healthcare as an employee and later as a consultant I suggest
it
is unworkable. (really long and ill structured sentence).
The major premise is When the patient calls back, someone who can accept
the call and pin number is available. The major premise, although well
intentioned, is false.
When I try to get to my Doctor's office, I get a call management system
99%
of the time. If I'm really lucky, I may get an answering service. People
who work for many answering services are part timers, sometimes from
temporary employment companies, working for minimum wage, with little or
no
healthcare background. Try and get them HIPAA certified.
(I have also done consulting on Doctors' answering services.)
I believe such a system would simply generate round after round of call
backs which are unsuccessful. If anyone thinks this would actually work,
should get another opinion and only pay for that opinion when the system
is
proven effective.
I really would like to talk to the people who have used this successfully
so
that I might add to my professional knowledge and moderate my opinion on
he
matter or... is this simply a scenario from a brainstorming session?
Additional comments are welcomed and desired. I find I learn more from
people who disagree.
Ben Tartaglia
Benjamin W. Tartaglia, MBA, BSIM, CSP
Director, Client Services
BWT Associates, HealthCare Consultants
HIPAA, JCAHO, Telemedicine, Contingency Planning, Telecommunications,
Telephone Fraud Abuse, Training Programs, Policy Procedures,
Management
Audits.
PO# 4515, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
Phone: 508-845-6000
EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Ribelin, Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 10:09 AM
To: WEDI SNIP Privacy Workgroup List
Subject: RE: HIPAA privacy and telephone
So far, the best scenario I have seen is the phone call that requests the
patient to call back to the office. Part of the call back involves a pin
or
secret code that the patient was provided previously.
Donald L. Ribelin
HIPAA Project Manager
Firsthealth of the Carolinas
(910) 215-2668
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Doug Webb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 9:51 AM
To: WEDI SNIP Privacy Workgroup List
Subject: Re: HIPAA privacy and telephone
An extension to this -- how do you handle answering machines?
My gut feeling is that either a no-no (the machine more questionable than
a
family member) -- the information could only be released to the patient or
his/her representative designated in a written authorizaton. Perhaps
another signature on your main consent/authorization form to allow these
types of communications is what's needed???
The opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily the opinion of
LCMH.
Douglas M. Webb
Computer System Engineer
Little Company of Mary Hospital Health Care Centers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This electronic message may contain information that is confidential
and/or
legally privileged. It is intended only for the use of the individual(s)
and
entity(s) named as recipients in the message. If you are not an intended
recipient of the message, please notify the sender immediately, delete
the
material from any computer, do not deliver, distribute, or copy this
message, and do not disclose its contents or take action
