Chris, I appreciate your conviction...but "sticking to my guns" ...as much as I want to, leaves me in the position of having systems I can't access because some of my vendors don't have the transactions ready....a no win situation!
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/21/02 08:58PM >>> Another Provider Comment: I'm not any more in favor of killing functioning systems than the next guy... particularly when the "legal" processes that providers would have to fall back on (e.g., phone inquiries) might be even less efficient than DDE. But folks... this is why we have decided to hold our collective feet to the fire with Transaction Rule and hard deadlines. I might even "vote" for allowing payors with mature, feature-rich DDE services some additional deadline relief, if there was good-faith effort toward creating a system that looked/functioned the same [from the provider's perspective] for all payers... and could be AUTOMATED in my practice management system... the same way for ALL payers. Allowing DDE systems to remain in place for any reason, would be very bad for providers. Small providers would essentially be "sentenced without parole" to non-standard, manual processes and the incentives for their software vendors to tackle "small system EDI" would completely evaporate. Doctors might "accept" this because, after all, what choice would they have? We should stick to our guns and try to do this just like it says in the Transaction rule. Regards, -Chris Christopher J. Feahr, OD Optiserv Consulting [For the vision care industry] Santa Rosa, CA 707-579-4984 707-529-2268 (cell/pager) http://VisionDataStandard.org http://Optiserv.com At 11:02 AM 10/21/2002 -0500, Mimi Hart wrote: >My opinion only... > >As a provider, I usually take the line that any system that is >proprietary only to a certain payer, and requires my staff to go >"outside" their system and data enter/key to look up a patient, is not >in our best interest. BUT, I also live in the real world, and as I have >learned over the last 6 months, eligibility and claim status inquiry >ability on many of my 30+ applications is going to be along time >coming.... > >So what good is shutting down a system that gives us useful, timely >information, in favor of a system that I can't take advantage of because >my applications are not electronic transaction ready? > > >Mimi Hart ӿ�* >Research Analyst, HIPAA >Iowa Health System >319-369-7767 (phone) >319-369-8365 (fax) >319-490-0637 (pager) >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/21/02 10:08AM >>> > >I'm not opposed to keeping the old system, provided it meets the >minimum standards for HIPAA compliance. This system sends PHI >over the internet in clear text. I have a problem with that. It's >also my >responsibility to make sure we don't put our organization at risk by >knowingly using a solution that is blatantly non-compliant, whether it > >be EDI content or privacy. It would be very hard for me to justify to > >the CEO why we are being fined for knowingly using a non-compliant >solution, personally, I enjoy getting a regular paycheck and take a >very conservative view about activities that might endanger the >continued reception. 8^) > >This is just one issue of several going on between the medicare >contractors in our state and the DHS offices, not an isolated item. > >I thank everyone for the feedback I've gotten so far. > > > Why are you so opposed to this? > > Keeping the old system indefinetely does not preclude a parallel, > > HIPAA compliant feature. Why do you insist on replacing a working, > > mature system with unproven technology. As long as routing and > > transport mechanisms for EDI are not standardized through HIPAA, it > > will be even dangerous and irresponsible to to "replace" and shut >down > > a working technology that plays an important part in the delivery of > > healthcare. Implicitly demanding the shut-down of a perfectly fine, > > working system because of HIPAA seems terribly dogmatic. I just saw > > the online system of Blue Cross of Alabama. It's a marvel and works > > impressively for eligibility, claims, status, authorizations and so > > on. The system is matured and through code tied into the systems of > > all major providers. People dread the thought of turning it off >just > > to please the letter of the law. BC of AL should seriously consider >to > > keep the system running until electronic exchange according HIPAA is > > proven, (for several years in all practicality). I think trading > > partner agreements that extend TPO status across to the consumers of > > these legacy services will satisfy the intent of the law if not the > > letter. > > > > Martin Scholl > > <mailto:mscholl@;martinscholl.com> > > <http://www.martinscholl.com> > > 301-924-5537 Voice > > 301-570-0139 Fax > > 301-613-9572 Cell > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Del Texley [mailto:dtexley@;lipa.net] > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 1:03 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: State Online system > > > > > > > > Our state has an online system to look at eligibility and > > claims/encouter data. It's just a mainframe/telnet session via > > dialup, leased line or internet. > > > > At a meeting yesterday we were given information about some minor > > changes to the system and of course it was asked what would be > > replacing it for HIPAA compliance. Imagine our surprise when the > > state informed us the system would continue in it's current form > > indefinately. > > > > When quizzed about HIPAA issues we were told the Dept. of Justice >had > > determined that the system was "not DDE" because "no claims data was > > input via the system" and was not performing HIPAA transactions > > because "no files were being transferred" and was therefore exempt > > from HIPAA. > > > > The stand of the contractors in the meeting was that regardless of > > whether the system was or wasn't DDE (which it is), the system was > > transmitting PHI in an electronic format and therefore was required >to > > adhere to privacy requirements, such as encryption of the data. > > > > I'm gathering information to send to the contact person as part of a > > request to revisit the classification of this system. Anybody have > > some suggestions on documentation sources or comments on the > > situation? > > > > Thanks > > > >Del Texley >LIPA Information Systems >(541) 484 6430 > > > >********************************************************************** >To be removed from this list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request. > >====================================================== > >The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. >The >discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the >individual >participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI >Board of >Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, >post >your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at >http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. >Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is >specifically prohibited. > > ********************************************* > >This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic >Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. �� 2510-2521, and contain >information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This >information is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or an >agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are >hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any >review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based on the >contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received >this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and >delete the original message. > > ********************************************* > > > >********************************************************************** >To be removed from this list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request. > >====================================================== > >The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The >discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual >participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of >Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post >your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at >http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. >Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is >specifically prohibited. ********************************************************************** To be removed from this list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request. ===================================================== The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically prohibited. ********************************************* This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. �� 2510-2521, and contain information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This information is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. ********************************************* ********************************************************************** To be removed from this list, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request. ====================================================== The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated. The discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP. If you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/. Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically prohibited.
