HIPAA
Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
From Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
Great Seal of the United States
Other short titles Kassebaum–Kennedy Act,
Kennedy–Kassebaum Act
Long title An Act To amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to improve portability and continuity of health insurance coverage in the
group and individual markets, to combat waste, fraud, and abuse in health
insurance and health care delivery, to promote the use of medical savings
accounts, to improve access to long-term care services and coverage, to simplify
the administration of health insurance, and for other purposes.
Acronyms
(colloquial) HIPAA (pronounced /ˈhɪpə/, HIP-uh)
Enacted by the 104th United
States Congress
Citations
Public law Pub.L. 104–191
Statutes at Large
110 Stat. 1936
Legislative history
Introduced in the House as H.R. 3103 by
Bill Archer (R-TX) on March 18, 1996
Committee consideration by House Ways
and Means
Passed the House on March 28, 1996 (267–151)
Passed the Senate
on April 23, 1996 (100–0, in lieu of S. 1028)
Reported by the joint
conference committee on July 31, 1996; agreed to by the House on August 1, 1996
(421–2) and by the Senate on August 2, 1996 (98–0)
Signed into law by
President Bill Clinton on August 21, 1996
The Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA; Pub.L. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936, enacted
August 21, 1996) was enacted by the United States Congress and signed by
President Bill Clinton in 1996. It has been known as the Kennedy–Kassebaum Act
or Kassebaum–Kennedy Act after two of its leading sponsors. The Act consists of
five Titles. Title I of HIPAA protects health insurance coverage for workers and
their families when they change or lose their jobs.Title II of HIPAA, known as
the Administrative Simplification (AS) provisions, requires the establishment of
national standards for electronic health care transactions and national
identifiers for providers, health insurance plans, and employers.Title III sets
guidelines for pre-tax medical spending accounts, Title IV sets guidelines for
group health plans, and Title V governs company-owned life insurance policies.
Titles
There are five sections to the act, known as titles.
Title I: Health Care Access, Portability, and Renewability
Title I of HIPAA
regulates the availability and breadth of group health plans and certain
individual health insurance policies. It amended the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act, the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code.
Title I requires the coverage of and also limits restrictions that a group health plan can place on benefits for preexisting conditions. Group health plans may refuse to provide benefits relating to preexisting conditions for a period of 12 months after enrollment in the plan or 18 months in the case of late enrollment.Title I allows individuals to reduce the exclusion period by the amount of time that they had "creditable coverage" prior to enrolling in the plan and after any "significant breaks" in coverage. "Creditable coverage" is defined quite broadly and includes nearly all group and individual health plans, Medicare, and Medicaid.A "significant break" in coverage is defined as any 63-day period without any creditable coverage.[8] Along with an exception, allowing employers to tie premiums or co-payments to tobacco use, or body mass index.
Title I also requires insurers to issue policies without exclusion to those leaving group health plans with creditable coverage (see above) exceeding 18 months, and renew individual policies for as long as they are offered or provide alternatives to discontinued plans for as long as the insurer stays in the market without exclusion regardless of health condition.
Some health care plans are exempted from Title I requirements, such as long-term health plans and limited-scope plans such as dental or vision plans that are offered separately from the general health plan. However, if such benefits are part of the general health plan, then HIPAA still applies to such benefits. For example, if the new plan offers dental benefits, then it must count creditable continuous coverage under the old health plan towards any of its exclusion periods for dental benefits.
An alternate method of calculating creditable continuous coverage is available to the health plan under Title I. That is, 5 categories of health coverage can be considered separately, including dental and vision coverage. Anything not under those 5 categories must use the general calculation (e.g., the beneficiary may be counted with 18 months of general coverage, but only 6 months of dental coverage, because the beneficiary did not have a general health plan that covered dental until 6 months prior to the application date). Since limited-coverage plans are exempt from HIPAA requirements, the odd case exists in which the applicant to a general group health plan cannot obtain certificates of creditable continuous coverage for independent limited-scope plans such as dental to apply towards exclusion periods of the new plan that does include those coverages.
Hidden exclusion periods are not valid under Title I (e.g., "The accident, to be covered, must have occurred while the beneficiary was covered under this exact same health insurance contract"). Such clauses must not be acted upon by the health plan and also must be re-written so that they comply with HIPAA.
Title II: Preventing Health Care Fraud and Abuse; Administrative Simplification; Medical Liability Reform
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve
this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be
challenged and removed. (April 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template
message)
Title II of HIPAA establishes policies and procedures for
maintaining the privacy and the security of individually identifiable health
information, outlines numerous offenses relating to health care, and establishes
civil and criminal penalties for violations. It also creates several programs to
control fraud and abuse within the health-care system.However, the most
significant provisions of Title II are its Administrative Simplification rules.
Title II requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to increase
the efficiency of the health-care system by creating standards for the use and
dissemination of health-care information.
These rules apply to "covered entities" as defined by HIPAA and the HHS. Covered entities include health plans, health care clearinghouses, such as billing services and community health information systems, and health care providers that transmit health care data in a way that is regulated by HIPAA.
Per the requirements of Title II, the HHS has promulgated five rules regarding Administrative Simplification: the Privacy Rule, the Transactions and Code Sets Rule, the Security Rule, the Unique Identifiers Rule, and the Enforcement Rule.
Privacy Rule
The effective compliance date of the Privacy Rule was April 14,
2003, with a one-year extension for certain "small plans". The HIPAA Privacy
Rule regulates the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information (PHI) held
by "covered entities" (generally, health care clearinghouses, employer sponsored
health plans, health insurers, and medical service providers that engage in
certain transactions.)By regulation, the Department of Health and Human Services
extended the HIPAA privacy rule to independent contractors of covered entities
who fit within the definition of "business associates".PHI is any information
held by a covered entity that concerns health status, provision of health care,
or payment for health care that can be linked to an individual.This is
interpreted rather broadly and includes any part of an individual's medical
record or payment history. Covered entities must disclose PHI to the individual
within 30 days upon request.They also must disclose PHI when required to do so
by law such as reporting suspected child abuse to state child welfare agencies.
Covered entities may disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials for law enforcement purposes as required by law (including court orders, court-ordered warrants, subpoenas) and administrative requests; or to identify or locate a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing person.
A covered entity may disclose PHI to certain parties to facilitate treatment, payment, or health care operations without a patient's express written authorization. Any other disclosures of PHI (Protected Health Information) require the covered entity to obtain written authorization from the individual for the disclosure.In any case, when a covered entity discloses any PHI, it must make a reasonable effort to disclose only the minimum necessary information required to achieve its purpose.
The Privacy Rule gives individuals the right to request that a covered entity correct any inaccurate PHI.It also requires covered entities to take reasonable steps to ensure the confidentiality of communications with individuals.For example, an individual can ask to be called at his or her work number instead of home or cell phone numbers.
The Privacy Rule requires covered entities to notify individuals of uses of their PHI. Covered entities must also keep track of disclosures of PHI and document privacy policies and procedures.They must appoint a Privacy Official and a contact person responsible for receiving complaints and train all members of their workforce in procedures regarding PHI.
An individual who believes that the Privacy Rule is not being upheld can file a complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR)However, according to the Wall Street Journal, the OCR has a long backlog and ignores most complaints. "Complaints of privacy violations have been piling up at the Department of Health and Human Services. Between April of 2003 and November 2006, the agency fielded 23,886 complaints related to medical-privacy rules, but it has not yet taken any enforcement actions against hospitals, doctors, insurers or anyone else for rule violations. A spokesman for the agency says it has closed three-quarters of the complaints, typically because it found no violation or after it provided informal guidance to the parties involved."However, in July 2011, UCLA agreed to pay $865,500 in a settlement regarding potential HIPAA violations. An HHS Office for Civil Rights investigation showed that from 2005 to 2008 unauthorized employees repeatedly and without legitimate cause looked at the electronic protected health information of numerous UCLAHS patients.
2013 Final Omnibus Rule Update
In January 2013, HIPAA was updated via the
Final Omnibus Rule.The updates included changes to the Security Rule and Breach
Notification portions of the HITECH Act. The most significant changes related to
the expansion of requirements to include business associates, where only covered
entities had originally been held to uphold these sections of the law.
Additionally, the definition of "significant harm" to an individual in the analysis of a breach was updated to provide more scrutiny to covered entities with the intent of disclosing breaches that previously were unreported. Previously an organization needed proof that harm had occurred whereas now organizations must prove that harm had not occurred.
Protection of PHI was changed from indefinite to 50 years after death. More severe penalties for violation of PHI privacy requirements were also approved.Health Information of Deceased Individuals 2013</ref>
The HIPAA Privacy rule may be waived during natural disaster. This was the case with Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
HITECH Act: Privacy Requirements
See the Privacy section of the Health
Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act).
Disclosure to relatives
According to their interpretations of HIPAA,
hospitals will not reveal information over the phone to relatives of admitted
patients. This has in some instances impeded the location of missing persons.
After the Asiana Airlines Flight 214 San Francisco crash, some hospitals were
reluctant to disclose the identities of passengers that they were treating,
making it difficult for Asiana and the relatives to locate them. In one
instance, a man in Washington state was unable to obtain information about his
injured mother.
Janlori Goldman, director of the advocacy group Health Privacy Project, said that some hospitals are being "overcautious" and misapplying the law, the Times reports. Suburban Hospital in Bethesda, Md., has interpreted a federal regulation that requires hospitals to allow patients to opt out of being included in the hospital directory as meaning that patients want to be kept out of the directory unless they specifically say otherwise. As a result, if a patient is unconscious or otherwise unable to choose to be included in the directory, relatives and friends might not be able to find them, Goldman said.
Transactions and Code Sets Rule
HIPAA was intended to make the health care
system in the United States more efficient by standardizing health care
transactions. HIPAA added a new Part C titled "Administrative Simplification" to
Title XI of the Social Security Act. This is supposed to simplify health care
transactions by requiring all health plans to engage in health care transactions
in a standardized way.
The HIPAA/EDI provision was scheduled to take effect from October 16, 2003 with a one-year extension for certain "small plans". However, due to widespread confusion and difficulty in implementing the rule, CMS granted a one-year extension to all parties. On January 1, 2012 newer versions, ASC X12 005010 and NCPDP D.0 become effective, replacing the previous ASC X12 004010 and NCPDP 5.1 mandate. The ASC X12 005010 version provides a mechanism allowing the use of ICD-10-CM as well as other improvements.
After July 1, 2005 most medical providers that file electronically had to file their electronic claims using the HIPAA standards in order to be paid.
Under HIPAA, HIPAA-covered health plans are now required to use standardized HIPAA electronic transactions. See, 42 USC § 1320d-2 and 45 CFR Part 162. Information about this can be found in the final rule for HIPAA electronic transaction standards (74 Fed. Reg. 3296, published in the Federal Register on January 16, 2009), and on the CMS website here: CMS information on HIPAA standardized electronic transactions.
Key EDI(X12) transactions used for HIPAA compliance are:
EDI Health Care Claim Transaction set (837) is used to submit health care claim billing information, encounter information, or both, except for retail pharmacy claims (see EDI Retail Pharmacy Claim Transaction). It can be sent from providers of health care services to payers, either directly or via intermediary billers and claims clearinghouses. It can also be used to transmit health care claims and billing payment information between payers with different payment responsibilities where coordination of benefits is required or between payers and regulatory agencies to monitor the rendering, billing, and/or payment of health care services within a specific health care/insurance industry segment.
For example, a state mental health agency may mandate all healthcare claims, Providers and health plans who trade professional (medical) health care claims electronically must use the 837 Health Care Claim: Professional standard to send in claims. As there are many different business applications for the Health Care claim, there can be slight derivations to cover off claims involving unique claims such as for institutions, professionals, chiropractors, and dentists etc.
EDI Retail Pharmacy Claim Transaction (NCPDP Telecommunications Standard version 5.1) is used to submit retail pharmacy claims to payers by health care professionals who dispense medications, either directly or via intermediary billers and claims clearinghouses. It can also be used to transmit claims for retail pharmacy services and billing payment information between payers with different payment responsibilities where coordination of benefits is required or between payers and regulatory agencies to monitor the rendering, billing, and/or payment of retail pharmacy services within the pharmacy health care/insurance industry segment.
EDI Health Care Claim Payment/Advice Transaction Set (835) can be used to make a payment, send an Explanation of Benefits (EOB), send an Explanation of Payments (EOP) remittance advice, or make a payment and send an EOP remittance advice only from a health insurer to a health care provider either directly or via a financial institution.
EDI Benefit Enrollment and Maintenance Set (834) can be used by employers, unions, government agencies, associations or insurance agencies to enroll members to a payer. The payer is a healthcare organization that pays claims, administers insurance or benefit or product. Examples of payers include an insurance company, health care professional (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), government agency (Medicaid, Medicare etc.) or any organization that may be contracted by one of these former groups.
EDI Payroll Deducted and other group Premium Payment for Insurance Products (820) is a transaction set for making a premium payment for insurance products. It can be used to order a financial institution to make a payment to a payee.
EDI Health Care Eligibility/Benefit Inquiry (270) is used to inquire about the health care benefits and eligibility associated with a subscriber or dependent.
EDI Health Care Eligibility/Benefit Response (271) is used to respond to a request inquiry about the health care benefits and eligibility associated with a subscriber or dependent.
EDI Health Care Claim Status Request (276) This transaction set can be used by a provider, recipient of health care products or services or their authorized agent to request the status of a health care claim.
EDI Health Care Claim Status Notification (277) This transaction set can be used by a health care payer or authorized agent to notify a provider, recipient or authorized agent regarding the status of a health care claim or encounter, or to request additional information from the provider regarding a health care claim or encounter. This transaction set is not intended to replace the Health Care Claim Payment/Advice Transaction Set (835) and therefore, is not used for account payment posting. The notification is at a summary or service line detail level. The notification may be solicited or unsolicited.
EDI Health Care Service Review Information (278) This transaction set can be used to transmit health care service information, such as subscriber, patient, demographic, diagnosis or treatment data for the purpose of request for review, certification, notification or reporting the outcome of a health care services review.
EDI Functional Acknowledgement Transaction Set (997) this transaction set can be used to define the control structures for a set of acknowledgments to indicate the results of the syntactical analysis of the electronically encoded documents. Although it is not specifically named in the HIPAA Legislation or Final Rule, it is necessary for X12 transaction set processing. The encoded documents are the transaction sets, which are grouped in functional groups, used in defining transactions for business data interchange. This standard does not cover the semantic meaning of the information encoded in the transaction sets.
Brief 5010 Transactions and Code Sets Rules Update Summary
Transaction Set
(997) will be replaced by Transaction Set (999) "acknowledgement report".
The
size of many fields {segment elements} will be expanded, causing a need for all
IT providers to expand corresponding fields, element, files, GUI, paper media
and databases.
Some segments have been removed from existing Transaction
Sets.
Many segments have been added to existing Transaction Sets allowing
greater tracking and reporting of cost and patient encounters.
Capacity to
use both "International Classification of Diseases" versions 9 (ICD-9) and 10
(ICD-10-CM) has been added.
Security Rule
The Final Rule on Security
Standards was issued on February 20, 2003. It took effect on April 21, 2003 with
a compliance date of April 21, 2005 for most covered entities and April 21, 2006
for "small plans".The Security Rule complements the Privacy Rule. While the
Privacy Rule pertains to all Protected Health Information (PHI) including paper
and electronic, the Security Rule deals specifically with Electronic Protected
Health Information (EPHI). It lays out three types of security safeguards
required for compliance: administrative, physical, and technical. For each of
these types, the Rule identifies various security standards, and for each
standard, it names both required and addressable implementation specifications.
Required specifications must be adopted and administered as dictated by the
Rule. Addressable specifications are more flexible. Individual covered entities
can evaluate their own situation and determine the best way to implement
addressable specifications. Some privacy advocates have argued that this
"flexibility" may provide too much latitude to covered entities.The standards
and specifications are as follows:
Administrative Safeguards – policies and procedures designed to clearly show how
the entity will comply with the act
Covered entities (entities that must
comply with HIPAA requirements) must adopt a written set of privacy procedures
and designate a privacy officer to be responsible for developing and
implementing all required policies and procedures.
The policies and
procedures must reference management oversight and organizational buy-in to
compliance with the documented security controls.
Procedures should clearly
identify employees or classes of employees who have access to electronic
protected health information (EPHI). Access to EPHI must be restricted to only
those employees who have a need for it to complete their job function.
The
procedures must address access authorization, establishment, modification, and
termination.
Entities must show that an appropriate ongoing training program
regarding the handling of PHI is provided to employees performing health plan
administrative functions.
Covered entities that out-source some of their
business processes to a third party must ensure that their vendors also have a
framework in place to comply with HIPAA requirements. Companies typically gain
this assurance through clauses in the contracts stating that the vendor will
meet the same data protection requirements that apply to the covered entity.
Care must be taken to determine if the vendor further out-sources any data
handling functions to other vendors and monitor whether appropriate contracts
and controls are in place.
A contingency plan should be in place for
responding to emergencies. Covered entities are responsible for backing up their
data and having disaster recovery procedures in place. The plan should document
data priority and failure analysis, testing activities, and change control
procedures.
Internal audits play a key role in HIPAA compliance by reviewing
operations with the goal of identifying potential security violations. Policies
and procedures should specifically document the scope, frequency, and procedures
of audits. Audits should be both routine and event-based.
Procedures should
document instructions for addressing and responding to security breaches that
are identified either during the audit or the normal course of operations.
Physical Safeguards – controlling physical access to protect against
inappropriate access to protected data
Controls must govern the introduction
and removal of hardware and software from the network. (When equipment is
retired it must be disposed of properly to ensure that PHI is not compromised.)
Access to equipment containing health information should be carefully controlled
and monitored.
Access to hardware and software must be limited to properly
authorized individuals.
Required access controls consist of facility security
plans, maintenance records, and visitor sign-in and escorts.
Policies are
required to address proper workstation use. Workstations should be removed from
high traffic areas and monitor screens should not be in direct view of the
public.
If the covered entities utilize contractors or agents, they too must
be fully trained on their physical access responsibilities.
Technical
Safeguards – controlling access to computer systems and enabling covered
entities to protect communications containing PHI transmitted electronically
over open networks from being intercepted by anyone other than the intended
recipient.
Information systems housing PHI must be protected from intrusion.
When information flows over open networks, some form of encryption must be
utilized. If closed systems/networks are utilized, existing access controls are
considered sufficient and encryption is optional.
Each covered entity is
responsible for ensuring that the data within its systems has not been changed
or erased in an unauthorized manner.
Data corroboration, including the use of
check sum, double-keying, message authentication, and digital signature may be
used to ensure data integrity.
Covered entities must also authenticate
entities with which they communicate. Authentication consists of corroborating
that an entity is who it claims to be. Examples of corroboration include:
password systems, two or three-way handshakes, telephone callback, and token
systems.
Covered entities must make documentation of their HIPAA practices
available to the government to determine compliance.
In addition to policies
and procedures and access records, information technology documentation should
also include a written record of all configuration settings on the components of
the network because these components are complex, configurable, and always
changing.
Documented risk analysis and risk management programs are required.
Covered entities must carefully consider the risks of their operations as they
implement systems to comply with the act. (The requirement of risk analysis and
risk management implies that the act's security requirements are a minimum
standard and places responsibility on covered entities to take all reasonable
precautions necessary to prevent PHI from being used for non-health purposes.)
Unique Identifiers Rule (National Provider Identifier)
HIPAA covered entities
such as providers completing electronic transactions, healthcare clearing
houses, and large health plans, must use only the National Provider Identifier
(NPI) to identify covered healthcare providers in standard transactions by May
23, 2007. Small health plans must use only the NPI by May 23, 2008.
Effective from May 2006 (May 2007 for small health plans), all covered entities using electronic communications (e.g., physicians, hospitals, health insurance companies, and so forth) must use a single new NPI. The NPI replaces all other identifiers used by health plans, Medicare, Medicaid, and other government programs.[44] However, the NPI does not replace a provider's DEA number, state license number, or tax identification number. The NPI is 10 digits (may be alphanumeric), with the last digit being a checksum. The NPI cannot contain any embedded intelligence; in other words, the NPI is simply a number that does not itself have any additional meaning. The NPI is unique and national, never re-used, and except for institutions, a provider usually can have only one. An institution may obtain multiple NPIs for different "sub-parts" such as a free-standing cancer center or rehab facility.
Enforcement Rule
On February 16, 2006, HHS issued the Final Rule regarding
HIPAA enforcement. It became effective on March 16, 2006. The Enforcement Rule
sets civil money penalties for violating HIPAA rules and establishes procedures
for investigations and hearings for HIPAA violations. For many years there were
few prosecutions for violations.
This may have changed with the fining of $50,000 to the Hospice of North Idaho (HONI) as the first entity to be fined for a potential HIPAA Security Rule breach affecting fewer than 500 people. Rachel Seeger, a spokeswoman for HHS, stated, "HONI did not conduct an accurate and thorough risk analysis to the confidentiality of ePHI as part of its security management process from 2005 through Jan. 17, 2012." This investigation was initiated with the theft from an employees vehicle of an unencrypted laptop containing 441 patient records.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009/Division A/Title XIII/Subtitle D
As of March 2013,
the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Resources (HHS) has investigated over 19,306
cases that have been resolved by requiring changes in privacy practice or by
corrective action. If noncompliance is determined by HHS, entities must apply
corrective measures. Complaints have been investigated against many different
types of businesses such as national pharmacy chains, major health care centers,
insurance groups, hospital chains and other small providers. There were 9,146
cases where the HHS investigation found that HIPAA was followed correctly. There
were 44,118 cases that HHS did not find eligible cause for enforcement; for
example, a violation that started before HIPAA started; cases withdrawn by the
pursuer; or an activity that does not actually violate the Rules. According to
the HHS website, the following lists the issues that have been reported
according to frequency:
Misuse and disclosures of PHI
No protection in place of health information
Patient unable to access their health information
Using or disclosing more
than the minimum necessary protected health information
No safeguards of
electronic protected health information.
The most common entities required to
take corrective action to be in voluntary compliance according to HHS are listed
by frequency:
Private
Practices
Hospitals
Outpatient Facilities
Group plans such as insurance
groups
Pharmacies
Title III: Tax-related health provisions governing
medical savings accounts
Title III standardizes the amount that may be saved
per person in a pre-tax medical savings account. Beginning in 1997, medical
savings account ("MSA") are available to employees covered under an
employer-sponsored high deductible plan of a small employer and self-employed
individuals.
Title IV:
Application and enforcement of group health insurance requirements
Title IV
specifies conditions for group health plans regarding coverage of persons with
pre-existing conditions, and modifies continuation of coverage requirements. It
also clarifies continuation coverage requirements and includes COBRA
clarification.
Title V:
Revenue offset governing tax deductions for employers
Title V includes
provisions related to company-owned life insurance for employers providing
company-owned life insurance premiums, prohibiting the tax-deduction of interest
on life insurance loans, company endowments, or contracts related to the
company. It also repeals the financial institution rule to interest allocation
rules. Finally, it amends provisions of law relating to people who give up
United States citizenship or permanent residence, expanding the expatriation tax
to be assessed against those deemed to be giving up their U.S. status for tax
reasons, and making ex-citizens' names part of the public record through the
creation of the Quarterly Publication of Individuals Who Have Chosen to
Expatriate.
Effects on
research and clinical care
The enactment of the Privacy and Security Rules
has caused major changes in the way physicians and medical centers operate. The
complex legalities and potentially stiff penalties associated with HIPAA, as
well as the increase in paperwork and the cost of its implementation, were
causes for concern among physicians and medical centers. An August 2006 article
in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine detailed some such concerns over the
implementation and effects of HIPAA.
Effects on research
HIPAA restrictions on researchers have affected their
ability to perform retrospective, chart-based research as well as their ability
to prospectively evaluate patients by contacting them for follow-up. A study
from the University of Michigan demonstrated that implementation of the HIPAA
Privacy rule resulted in a drop from 96% to 34% in the proportion of follow-up
surveys completed by study patients being followed after a heart attack.Another
study, detailing the effects of HIPAA on recruitment for a study on cancer
prevention, demonstrated that HIPAA-mandated changes led to a 73% decrease in
patient accrual, a tripling of time spent recruiting patients, and a tripling of
mean recruitment costs.
In addition, informed consent forms for research studies now are required to include extensive detail on how the participant's protected health information will be kept private. While such information is important, the addition of a lengthy, legalistic section on privacy may make these already complex documents even less user-friendly for patients who are asked to read and sign them.
These data suggest that the HIPAA privacy rule, as currently implemented, may be having negative impacts on the cost and quality of medical research. Dr. Kim Eagle, professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan, was quoted in the Annals article as saying, "Privacy is important, but research is also important for improving care. We hope that we will figure this out and do it right."
Effects on
clinical care
The complexity of HIPAA, combined with potentially stiff
penalties for violators, can lead physicians and medical centers to withhold
information from those who may have a right to it. A review of the
implementation of the HIPAA Privacy Rule by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office found that health care providers were "uncertain about their legal
privacy responsibilities and often responded with an overly guarded approach to
disclosing information ... than necessary to ensure compliance with the Privacy
rule".Reports of this uncertainty continue.
Costs of implementation
In the period immediately prior to the enactment of
the HIPAA Privacy and Security Acts, medical centers and medical practices were
charged with getting "into compliance". With an early emphasis on the
potentially severe penalties associated with violation, many practices and
centers turned to private, for-profit "HIPAA consultants" who were intimately
familiar with the details of the legislation and offered their services to
ensure that physicians and medical centers were fully "in compliance". In
addition to the costs of developing and revamping systems and practices, the
increase in paperwork and staff time necessary to meet the legal requirements of
HIPAA may impact the finances of medical centers and practices at a time when
insurance companies and Medicare reimbursement is also declining.
Education and training
Education and training of healthcare providers is
paramount to correct implementation of the HIPAA Privacy and Security Acts.
Effective training must describe the statutory and regulatory background and
purpose of HIPAA and a general summary of the principles and key provisions of
the Privacy Rule.
HIPAA
and drug and alcohol rehabilitation organizations
Special considerations for
confidentiality are needed for health care organizations that offer federally
funded drug or alcohol rehabilitation services.
Predating HIPAA by over a quarter century are the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 and language amended by the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972.
Violations of HIPAA
HIPAA Chart illustrating HIPAA violations by Type
A
breakdown of the HIPAA violations that resulted in the illegal exposure of
personal information.
According to the US Department of Health and Human
Services Office for Civil Rights, between April 2003 and January 2013, it
received 91,000 complaints of HIPAA violations, in which 22,000 led to
enforcement actions of varying kinds (from settlements to fines) and 521 led to
referrals to the US Department of Justice as criminal actions. Examples of
significant breaches of protected information and other HIPAA violations
include:
the largest
loss of data that affected 4.9 million people by Tricare Management of Virginia
in 2011
the largest fines of $4.3 million levied against Cignet Health of
Maryland in 2010 for ignoring patients' requests to obtain copies of their own
records and repeated ignoring of federal officials' inquiries
the first
criminal indictment was lodged in 2011 against a Virginia physician who shared
information with a patient's employer "under the false pretenses that the
patient was a serious and imminent threat to the safety of the public, when in
fact he knew that the patient was not such a threat."
The differences between
civil and criminal penalties are summarized in the following table:
Type of Violation CIVIL Penalty (min) CIVIL Penalty (max)
Individual did not
know (and by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known) that he/she
violated HIPAA $100 per violation, with an annual maximum of $25,000 for repeat
violations $50,000 per violation, with an annual maximum of $1.5 million
HIPAA violation due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect $1,000
per violation, with an annual maximum of $100,000 for repeat violations $50,000
per violation, with an annual maximum of $1.5 million
HIPAA violation due to
willful neglect but violation is corrected within the required time period
$10,000 per violation, with an annual maximum of $250,000 for repeat violations
$50,000 per violation, with an annual maximum of $1.5 million
HIPAA violation
is due to willful neglect and is not corrected $50,000 per violation, with an
annual maximum of $1,000,000 $50,000 per violation, with an annual maximum of
$1.5 million
Type of Violation CRIMINAL Penalty
Covered entities and
specified individuals who "knowingly" obtain or disclose individually
identifiable health information A fine of up to $50,000
Imprisonment up to 1
year
Offenses committed
under false pretenses A fine of up to $100,000
Imprisonment up to 5 years
Offenses committed with the intent to sell, transfer, or use individually
identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain or
malicious harm A fine of up to $250,000
Imprisonment up to 10 years
Legislative information
Pub.L. 104–191, 110 Stat. 1936
H.R. 3103; H. Rept.
104-469, part 1; H. Rept. 104-736
S. 1028; S. 1698; S. Rept. 104-156
HHS
Security Standards, 45 C.F.R. 160, 162, and 164
HHS Standards for Privacy of
Individually Identifiable Health Information, 45 C.F.R. 160 and 164