Re: section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B)

2003-03-26 Thread Doug Webb
Leah Hole-Curry To: WEDI SNIP Privacy Workgroup List Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 03:03 PM Subject: Re: section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B) Leslie,In my opinion, while it would be good to apply some minimum necessaryprincipals, I don't think you are require

Re: section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B)

2003-03-26 Thread Doug Webb
IP Privacy Workgroup List Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 08:30 AM Subject: RE: section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B) Leslie - I agree with your approach. However, let me play devil's advocate on the last part of your message - Suppose I am a cardiologist, and am seeing a new patient in

section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B)

2003-03-25 Thread Harpe, Leslie
Your opinions on the following scenario: A patient is seen in the ER last night. Dr. A ordered labs. Dr. B calls the lab for the results today. Lab only knows the ordering doctor. Based on the fact that Dr. B knows labs were ordered and according to section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B), we are going

Re: section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B)

2003-03-25 Thread Leah Hole-Curry
knows the ordering doctor. Based on the fact that Dr. B knows labs were ordered and according to section 164.514(d)(3)(iii)(B), we are going to release the lab results without an authorization. We believe that this is continuum of care and we are releasing to another covered entity. (No disclosure