Health Information Exchanges (HIEs): The Impact of HIPAA and the HITECH Act December 4, 2009 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 52
About This Presentation

Health Information Exchanges (HIEs): The Impact of HIPAA and the HITECH Act December 4, 2009


Health Information Exchanges (HIEs): The Impact of HIPAA and the HITECH Act December 4, 2009 Linda M. Kinney, MHA Care Share Health Alliance Alicia Gilleskie, Esq. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:670
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: LaurenR153


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Health Information Exchanges (HIEs): The Impact of HIPAA and the HITECH Act December 4, 2009

Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) The Impact
of HIPAA and the HITECH Act December 4, 2009
  • Linda M. Kinney, MHA
  • Care Share Health Alliance
  • Alicia Gilleskie, Esq.
  • Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell
    Jernigan, L.L.P.
  • David Kirby,
  • Dial 1-866-740-1260 Passcode 8618356

Webinar Logistics
  • If you have problems accessing the audio or
    visual portion of this webinar call
  • All lines will be muted during the presentation
  • To ask a question during the Questions Answers
  • Unmute press 7
  • Mute press 6
  • Please provide us with feedback about the webinar
    by completing the post-webinar survey

Webinar Overview
  • Introduction to Care Share Health Alliance
    Linda Kinney
  • Presentation Alicia Gilleskie and Dave Kirby
  • Background on Health Information Exchanges,
    HIPAA and the HITECH Act
  • The Impact of HITECH on Health Information
  • Risk management issues to consider
  • Question Answer Session moderated by Linda

  • Introduction
  • Linda Kinney

What is Care Share Health Alliance?
  • Care Share is an independent, statewide resource
    that brings people together to improve the health
    of low-income, uninsured persons.
  • We do this by supporting the development of
    Collaborative Networks, building collaboration
    between providers and strengthening the safety
  • We provide technical assistance around building
    collaboration, program development, capacity
    building, evaluation, business process
    assessment, and community-wide planning.
  • For more information visit www.CareShareHealth.or

Collaborative Networks and Data Sharing
The goals of Collaborative Networks and
collaboration between providers is to Improve
access and the delivery of services Reduce
duplication Facilitate effective and efficient
utilization of services Maintain quality of
care To do this effectively collaborative
partners must share information with each other.
Including electronic health information.
  • Presentation
  • Alicia Gilleskie and Dave Kirby

Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) The Impact
of HIPAA and the HITECH Act
  • Presentation
  • Background on Health Information Exchanges,
    HIPAA and the HITECH Act
  • The Impact of HITECH on Health Information
  • Risk management issues to consider

Health Information Exchanges (HIEs)
  • What is a Health Information Exchange?
  • Improved Collaboration
  • Allows transparency for treatment, care
    coordination, quality assessment and improvement
    activities, such as case management, outcome
    evaluations, development of clinical guidelines
  • Emerging HIEs in NC
  • NC is a pioneer state in HIE implementation

Health Information Technology for Economic and
Clinical Health Act (HITECH)
  • What is HITECH?
  • Enacted as part of the American Recovery and
    Reinvestment Act of 2009
  • Expansive changes to HIPAA aimed at encouraging
    the sharing of electronic health information
  • Provides funding assistance and incentives to
    encourage implementation of electronic health
    records (EHRs)

Key Traditional HIPAA Privacy/Security Elements
Related to HIEs
The HIPAA Privacy Rule- key HIE elements
  • Permission and requirements to disclose PHI
  • Uses and disclosures via an HIE are still covered
    under the Privacy Rules set of permitted and
    required uses and disclosures. HITECH has new
    requirements to disclose electronically to
  • Mitigation of Harm
  • Mitigating harm from an impermissible
    use/disclosure is still a requirement that is in
    effect and covers non-permitted disclosures/uses
    via HIE. HIEs introduce more risk that if not
    neutralized will lead to more harm to be
    mitigated. New Notice of Breach provisions in
    HITECH more specifically address one form of

The HIPAA Privacy Rule- key HIE elements
  • Accounting of disclosures
  • Providing an accounting of a limited list of
    disclosures (e.g. public health case reporting)
    to the patient upon request is still a
    requirement. A new HITECH element requires
    accounting of e-disclosures for treatment,
    payment and operations. Most HIE disclosures are
    likely to require an accounting. Some forms of
    HIEs do this automatically or avoid the need for
    accounting by being the patients agent.
  • Provision of designated record set to patients.
  • This requirement is still in effect and is
    extended with a specific HITECH requirement to
    transmit ePHI to patients (likely via an HIE)
  • Required public good disclosures (e.g. public
    health reportable conditions)
  • These disclosure requirements are still in effect
    and some forms are required to be done
    electronically (likely via an HIE) under HITECH.

HIPAA Security Rule key HIE elements
  • Use of encryption on open networks
  • Most HIEs are designed to operate on open
    networks. This requirement in the Security Rule
    compels the use of encryption. New HITECH
    requirements make use of encryption attractive
    for all PHI data flows and data stores
    especially in HIEs.
  • Audit log collection and use
  • This requirement is still present and EHR
    interactions with HIEs will likely mean that more
    use and review will be needed to be done to
    manage the increased risks to confidentiality.

HIPAA Security Rule key HIE elements
  • Security incident management
  • This requirement to report and respond to
    security incidents will be especially important
    in an HIE environment to reducing harm and
    maintaining public confidence in HIE. There will
    likely be more occasions when many organizations
    will be involved in responding to one incident.
  • Data integrity
  • This requires that there be protections against
    loss/corruption of PHI. This becomes more
    challenging in an HIE environment where new data
    arrives routinely from a variety external
  • Data access management
  • This requirement to limit access is more
    challenging to meet in an HIE environment where
    there are more people with changing access rights
    over shorter periods of time. Person-oriented HIE
    models let patients define the rules for sharing
    across organizations.

HIPAA Security Rule key HIE elements
  • Contingency management
  • Availability of data in an HIE is critical and
    especially difficult for federated model HIEs
    (where the data is retained in the originating
    organizations). So, contingency management at
    provider sites (where the data will be until
    requested) will be harder and more important.

Other HIE-related laws
  • NC State Law Notice of breach (NC ITPA 2005)
  • This law would apply to breaches as part of the
    typical HIEs operations. One would expect more
    breaches in an active HIE. This applies to any
    business or government agency in NC including ASP
    EHR operations, web-based PHR operators, HIE
  • Other Special regulations covering drug and
    alcohol treatment records, and mental health
    records (42 CFR Part 2), Red Flags, FERPA
  • These laws apply to an HIE environment when the
    contributing entities are covered. Observing each
    law in an entity-oriented HIE environment will
    require more work. Somewhat less work in a
    person-oriented HIE (where the patient agent is
    controlling the data.)

A Sampling of HITECH provisions and their
Potential Effects on HIEs
  • Changes to HIPAA
  • Expanded Responsibilities and Liability for
    Business Associates
  • Breach Notification
  • Enforcement
  • Penalties
  • Restrictions
  • Accounting of Disclosures
  • Sale of PHI
  • Meaningful use of EHR
  • Will HITECH encourage or hinder the sharing of
    electronic health information?

Business Associates
  • Definition of Business Associate (BA)
  • A person who, on behalf of a Covered Entity
    (CE) performs a function or activity involving
    the use or disclosure of PHI (excluding members
    of the CEs workforce).
  • Business Associate Agreement (BAA)
  • Written contract with CE governing the use and
    disclosure of PHI and protection of privacy
  • Include certain specific provisions required
    under HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules

Business Associates
  • Contractors or other non-workforce members doing
    work for CE where work involves use/disclosure of
    Protected Health Information (PHI)
  • A CE can be a business associate of another CE
  • HITECH clarifies that organizations such as HIEs,
    Regional Health Information Organizations (RHIO)
    and eRx gateways that provide data transmission
    of PHI, that require routine access to PHI are
    BAs and must enter into BAAs with the CE

Expanded Role and Liability for Business
  • Explanation Business Associate compliance with
    BAAs become a direct requirement of HIPAA.
    Expanded oversight role by Business Associates.
  • Effective date 2/17/2010
  • Key Effects on HIEs Non-compliance may
    constitute direct violation of HIPAA and BAA,
    posing risk of double liability

HIPAA Security Rule Compliance
  • Explanation Today, BAs are contractually
    responsible for compliance with the mini HIPAA
    Security Rule. BAs become responsible for
    complying with the full HIPAA Security Rule.
  • Effective date 2/17/2010
  • Key Effects on HIEs All parties to HIE (covered
    entities and business associates) may be bound by
    the HIPAA Security Rule Standards (required or
  • Administrative Safeguards
  • Physical Safeguards
  • Technical Safeguards
  • HIPAA Security Rule organizational requirements,
    policies, procedures and documentation

Breach Notification
  • Explanation Breach notification provisions apply
    to CEs and BAs. CE obligation to notify each
    individual whose unsecured PHI has been, or is
    reasonably believed to have been, accessed,
    acquired, used or disclosed as a result of the
    breach. BAs required to notify CEs following BAs
    discovery of a breach of unsecured PHI.
  • Key issues what constitutes a breach and
    unsecured PHI
  • Effective date (already past) 9/23/2009
  • Key Effects on HIEs Increased time spent by all
    parties analyzing whether breach notice
    obligation triggered and how to notify.
  • Upside for patient privacy
  • Downside for compliance coordination among parties

Breach Notification
  • CE Notice Requirements
  • Recipients
  • Notify affected individuals whose PHI has been or
    is reasonably believed to have been breached
  • Timing
  • Without unreasonable delay, but in no event later
    than 60 days following discovery (unless it would
    impede a criminal investigation)
  • Content
  • What happened
  • Types of unsecured PHI
  • What CE is doing to investigate the breach,
    mitigate harm, protect against further breaches
  • Contact procedures for affected individuals,
    including toll-free number, email address,
    website or postal address

Breach Notification under HITECH
  • BA Notice Requirements
  • Recipients
  • Notify CE to which the breached information
  • Timing
  • Without unreasonable delay but no later than 60
    days following the BAs discovery of the breach
  • Content
  • Identify affected individuals to the extent
    possible and other information available to BA

  • February 17, 2009 State attorneys general
    authorized to bring civil actions to enforce
    HIPAA violations
  • Attorneys general bringing civil actions under
    HIPAA must give DHHS opportunity to intervene
  • February 17, 2010 HIPAA criminal enforcement
    provisions apply to individuals
  • Criminal fines and jail time for intentional
  • U.S. Department of Justice investigates and
    prosecutes criminal violations
  • February 17, 2011 DHHS must formally investigate
    complaints where preliminary investigation
    indicates potential violation of HIPAA due to
    willful neglect
  • Key Effects on HIEs Potential deterrent effect
    on individual misconduct may lessen oversight
    burden of entities participating in HIEs. On the
    other hand, enforcement will increase, making
    attention to compliance a priority.

Greater Penalties
  • Civil Penalties
  • Previously, civil monetary penalties (CMPs)
    limited to 100 per violation, not to exceed
    25,000 for identical violations during a
    calendar year
  • Key Effects on HIEs Money talks. These will
    hit home for covered entities and business
    associates participating in HIEs.

Violation categorySection 1176(a)(1) Each violation All such violations of an identical provision in a calendar year
(A) Did Not Know 100 50,000 1,500,000
(B) Reasonable Cause 1,000 50,000 1,500,000
(C)(i) Willful Neglect Corrected 10,000 50,000 1,500,000
(C)(i) Willful Neglect Not Corrected 50,000 1,500,000
Self-pay episode disclosure restrictions -Section
  • Explanation People who have health insurance
    sometimes pay for care out of pocket in order to
    protect their privacy. Some providers have had a
    history of nonetheless reporting these self-pay
    episodes to payers- thwarting that privacy need.
    This new restriction requires covered entities
    not to disclose data (electronic or paper) from
    such self-pay episodes if a patient requests
  • Effective date 2/17/2010 no regulations
  • Likely key effects on providers
  • Most providers wont change disclosure policy,
    but will likely want to revisit how they document
    and implement requests to restrict disclosures
    (as required in the Privacy Rule)
  • For providers who allow access to records by
    payer-based case managers (e.g. hospitals),
    efforts will have to be made to segregate
    self-pay data.
  • In EHRs, as data is reused in various functions,
    segregation of self-pay data may be challenging.
    (e.g. allergy data collected in a self-pay
  • Definition of episode of care will need

Accounting of Treatment, Payment, Operations
(TPO) Electronic Disclosures- Section 13405(c )
  • Explanation The HIPAA Privacy Rule has long
    required that a list of non-TPO disclosures be
    reported to the patient upon request (i.e.
    provided date, recipient, content description,
    purpose). The new requirement adds that all
    electronic disclosures by EHR-using CEs and BAs
    made for TPO purposes going back 3 years also be
    reported to the patient upon request. Covered
    Entities can either report for BAs or direct
    patients to BAs for supplemental reports.
  • Effective Date For those who have an EHR on
    1/1/09, accounting starts 1/1/2014 For those who
    acquire EHR after 1/1/09, accounting starts
    1/1/11 or when EHR is acquired, whichever is
    later. HHS can delay a couple of years if
    desired. Expect regulations 7/2010.
  • Likely key effects on providers
  • e-TPO disclosures are common (e.g. to payers,
    referrals) and will become much more common as
    people approach meaningful use objectives.
  • Collecting the data may not be much of an
    additional burden most CEs would want the log
    of accounting data for their own use.
  • HHS will make regs on which data goes into the
    accounting. (about 7/10)
  • BA Agreement and process adjustments. (Will you
    do the accounting for BA work or will the BA?)

Selling PHI - Section 13405(d )
  • Explanation CEs and BAs who receive direct or
    indirect remuneration for providing PHI to third
    parties must have patient authorization (HIPAA
    style). The issue being addressed with this
    requirement is that the prior restrictions in
    HIPAA on PHI sale were thought to still allow too
    much sale of PHI outside of patient expectations.
    CE/BA can receive remuneration disclosures for
    public health (limited), research (limited),
    treatment, CE sale to CE, payment of BA, patient.
    Some HHS leeway to define other exceptions.)
  • Effective Date No later than 2/17/2011 HHS
    regs by 8/17/2010,
  • Likely key effects on providers
  • Most providers not affected
  • Revisit of practices related to BAs, research,
    public health.

Patient right of electronic access to ePHI-
Section 13405(e)
  • Explanation HIPAA Privacy Rule established a
    federal right to patient access to PHI (the
    designated record set) under virtually all
    circumstances. This ARRA provision adds a right
    for the patient to obtain an e-PHI copy from
    EHR-using CE or direct that the CE transmit
    e-PHI copy directly to patient-chosen entity or
    person. (e.g. Send my ePHI to my PHR). CE
    charges limited to labor costs. Note that this
    right is separate from the meaningful use of EHR
    objectives that require engaging patients and
    families with HIT.
  • Effective Date No regs explicitly called for
    No explicit date found likely 2/17/10
  • Likely key effects on providers
  • transmit may mean transmit- not hand a CD or
    thumb drive copy.
  • Support extent for interfaces to recipients (e.g.
    HealthVault, Google Health, iHealthRecord, Keas
    and lots of others) not clear.
  • This requirement is a key incentive to use
    patients as pivots for sharing data generally.
  • Potential for abuse e.g. marketers becoming
    valid recipients without informed consent of
  • Identifying patients (e.g. keeping PHR

Meaningful use (MU) of EHR- Sec Medicare
4101(ambulatory), 4102 (hospitals), 4013,4104,
Medicaid 4201
  • Explanation A large scale (17B, 600M in NC)
    incentive program to encourage EHR/PHR usage.
    Typical provider (e.g. physician, NP, PA) gets
    45K-60K in form of Medicaid/Medicare bonus
    reimbursement for 1)meaningful use of certified
    EHR, 2) HIE, reporting on MU. 70 recommended
    objectives spread over 5 years in these areas
    Engaging patients and families (PHRs etc),
    improving care coordination, ensuring adequate
    privacy and security, improving population and
    public health, improving quality, safety,
    efficiency and reducing health disparities.
  • Effective Date Incentive payments are per year
    with a lot of front loading starting in 2011 (to
    2015). Some chance of penalties for non-MUser
    Medicare providers after 2015. Draft regs
  • Likely key effects on providers
  • Serious money serious challenge Much more
    electronic communication with patients.
  • Cant do it alone (especially the HIE part)
  • Private payers will likely follow suit (i.e.
    condition payment on EHR/PHR usage)
  • Very complicated careful planning required.
  • Other programs (Regional Extension, State HIE
    Collaborative, EHR loan) support.

Risks of HIEs and Related HITECH Considerations
HIE Challenges and Risks
  • Maintaining Purity of Database Contents
  • Integrity, right to use and disclose,
  • Multiple data sources
  • Multiple party access
  • Need to conduct data flow compliance analysis
  • Ensuring appropriate BAAs are in place
  • User education

HIE Challenges and Risks
  • Potential double jeopardy for BAs
  • Increased operational duties and liability
    exposure under a new, complex operational scheme
  • Risk of poisoning the well and using data
    provided by third parties without proper

Distribution of Security Risks
  • The issue
  • The typical provider focuses primarily on
    security for its internal operations and
    considers risk to itself. (e.g. risk of
    inappropriate use/disclosure of PHI, uptime of
    the system, local data integrity issues)
  • In an HIE security risks are distributed across
    the HIE users.
  • The risk sharing model must satisfy each party
    (e.g. hospital, physicians, payers, patients,
    public health, researchers) or they wont
    participate fully (or at least resist
  • Making security cost-benefit tradeoffs that
    satisfy everyone in the sharing system is harder
    than making tradeoffs that only have to satisfy
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • Concerns about PHI confidentiality, integrity,
    and availability will need to be revisited with
    this new sharing model in which disclosures are
    frequent and automatic.
  • Need for auditable standards in the HIE and at
    the connected parties systems.

Size and dynamism of the routine data sharing
  • The issue
  • Typical HIE will have a large and dynamic
    community of information providers and
    recipients. (e.g. hospitals, physicians,
    patients, payers, researchers, public health).
  • Consider the challenge of managing registration,
    authentication, access audits, and authorizations
    among the members of this large and dynamic
  • How will access changes be made when
    practitioners are no longer eligible for access
    (retired, quit, fired). How will changes in the
    legal competence of individuals affect access?
  • Just to make things interesting you cant
    depend on having a compulsory universal health
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • There will be new external ids (of patients,
    other providers) for each provider to keep and
  • Providers will likely have to register/de-register
    staff for access to external data.

Use of comprehensive longitudinal patient record
  • The issue
  • Having all of the relevant historical data about
    a person accessible for care, research, personal
    use is the core attraction for an HIE.
  • But, having this CLR also raises the risk of
    inappropriate disclosure.
  • Data shared via an HIE may be used over longer
    times and for purposes not expected by the data
    originator. The limits on time and usage today
    help manage the risk of data being used for
    purposes for which it is not suitable/permitted.
  • Having the data in one place means that
    availability depends on that place being up and
    on being connected to the inquiring party. Having
    data spread (as in a federated model) requires
    that a lot of places be up at the same time to
    satisfy some inquiries.
  • What happens when an HIE/storage facility goes
    out of business?
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • Need to focus business process on dependence of
    CLR availability
  • Need to determine medical/legal acceptability of

Changes in amount and effects of erroneous data
being shared.
  • The issue Well functioning HIEs spread data
    quickly whether it is true or not. Errors come
    from two main sources
  • - Accident
  • usually human error
  • right data wrong patient mismatch is a typical
    error (Factoid About .1 to 1 of patient record
    selection operations that precede data entry
    select the wrong patient)
  • Small environments (typical medical practice)
    with a lot of context and personal knowledge of
    patients help to keep this problem down.
  • -Fraud, Medical ID Theft
  • To obtain services without paying
  • To hide conditions
  • To obtain money for services not rendered
  • HINs will likely exacerbate the level of
    erroneous data due to the relative distance
    (in time, space, context) of the provider from
    the user of the data.
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • Need to consider which data will be taken to be
    actionable and which requires corroboration.
  • Need to consider how to inform the community when
    previously shared data is found to be incorrect.

Changing (HITECH and beyond) environment of laws,
standards, and regulations
  • The issue
  • . There is a large and growing set of public
    policies (i.e. laws and regulations) related to
    health information security and privacy. Notably,
    enforcement of privacy and security measures was
    strengthened in HITECH.
  • Generally they are meant
  • to protect the person who is the subject of the
    information from misuse of their information by
    others (third party disclosure laws),
  • to help make amends if the information is
    misused, and
  • to assure that the person has reasonable access
    to the data.
  • There are also growing set of laws,
    regulations, standards, and other incentives that
    incite providers to engage in more routine
    electronic information sharing.
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • They will more frequently have to actively manage
    these risks and anticipate and respond to public
    policy changes.
  • Providers may choose to bet that more consumer
    protections/rights will emerge.

Risks of failing to engage in routine information
  • The issue
  • Lets wait until the dust settles is a less
    attractive option than it has been historically.
    Waiting risks loss of incentive payments, penalty
    impositions, various forms of non-compliance
    actions or business disadvantages.
  • Likely key impacts on providers
  • Providers will be less able to respond to privacy
    and security issues in data sharing by not
    sharing the data because of general concerns
    about risk.
  • Waiting to pursue adopting the various privacy
    and security elements in ARRA/HITECH has
    significant risks.

Approaches to Managing Risks in HIE
Managing Risks of HIE Participation
  • Fair Allocation of Risk under Data Access
  • Cyber Insurance
  • Different policy types
  • Privacy liability coverage may cover damages and
    claims related to privacy breaches, breaches of
    specific privacy laws and regulations, such as
  • Security liability coverage may cover damages and
    claims arising out of computer attacks caused by
    failures of security including theft of client
    information, identify theft, negligent
    transmission of computer viruses and denial of
    service liability.

Managing Risks of HIE Participation
  • Relatively new type of insurance with potentially
    high premiums application process for policies
    may be long and detailed
  • Obtaining a policy when participating in HIE
  • May be contractual requirement under HIE
    participation agreement
  • May be a good business decision dependent on
    type of system and risks of misuse or
    unauthorized access
  • Potential Coverage Under Existing Policies
  • Standalone cyber-insurance policy may not be
  • Cyber-liability endorsement to a CGL or EO
    policy may work

Adjust existing security measures
  • In anticipation of this new environment
  • Review and update your HIPAA-required risk
  • Likely key typical provider changes and tasks
  • Review and update staff training on security,
    sanction policy
  • Review and update your contingency plan
  • Consider the reliability/capacity of your
    broadband connection.
  • Assure unique accounts, robust passwords and no
    account sharing
  • Note that affordable and useful insurance is
    likely to require that you have a robust security
    program. These requirements may affect your
    security program.
  • Setup to capture, retain, and review access logs
    start periodic reviews.

Shifting/reducing risks
  • In anticipation of this new environment
  • Consider how risk (to PHI confidentiality,
    availability, and integrity) are distributed
    among you, your peers, BAs, patients in a routine
    e-sharing environment. BAs are now covered
    directly by ARRA explore how this shifts risks.
  • Likely key typical provider changes and tasks
  • Consider HIE governance elements that affect risk
    distribution. How will bad actors be managed?
    What would happen if you were a bad actor?
  • Educate patients about their role in security
    and where your role ends.
  • Consider cyber-insurance for some costs
    associated with new risks (e.g. breach notice
    costs). Recognize that affordable insurance will
    likely come with obligations to run a secure
  • Consult your attorney about the shift in your
    general business risk and malpractice risks.

Collaborating with peers
  • In anticipation of this new environment
  • Determine who your key partners will be and how
    to work with them in new or existing forums.
    Make/adjust forums if needed.
  • Likely key typical provider changes and tasks
  • Formulate projects in these forums that focus on
  • Issues that require group consensus (e.g. HIE
    governance issues)
  • Issues that are solved more easily via
    group-generated information/support (e.g.
    generation of check lists. Model RFPs, training
    on security/privacy).
  • Consider how to minimize the time delay in action
    normally associated with reaching consensus with
    peers on an issue.
  • NC has many useful peer-based forums NCHICA,
    CareShare, NCPHIT Committee, NCALHD, HWTFs HIT
    Collaborative, others.

Working with the public
  • In anticipation of this new environment
  • Determine when to approach your patients on this
    change and via what means.
  • Likely key typical provider changes and tasks
  • Aiding patients in understanding your data
    sharing policies.
  • Helping patients understand how you share data
    with them electronically and the best form of
    partnership to make that sharing productive.
  • Prepare how you will interact with patients
    about accounting of disclosure requests,
    self-pay restriction requests, providing e-copies
    of various PHI collections, notice of breach.

Online Resources
  • Key HHS web site
  • http// - see, especially,
    links labeled Meaningful Use - for a list of
    the meaningful use objectives recommendations.
  • Privacy and Security - for key documents
    related to HITECH and HIPAA PS elements.
  • - links to tools and
    collaboration opportunities.
  • http//
    ml - question and answer format

  • Questions Answers
  • Un-mute press 7
  • Mute press 6
  • Name
  • Type of Organization
  • (free clinic, hospital, health center,)
  • County
  • Be brief

Contact Information
  • Alicia A. Gilleskie
  • Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett,
  • Mitchell Jernigan, LLP
  • 919-821-6741

Dave Kirby Kirby Information Management
Consulting, LLC
919-272-1157 Care Share Health
Alliance 919-861-8355
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)