Is HIPAA's New Harm Threshold Good News or Bad?
Chris Simons, RHIA, director of UM & HIM and the privacy officer at Spring Harbor Hospital in Westbrook, ME, says the harm threshold provision in the interim final rule leaves the rule "nowhere near as strict as I was expecting."
"Privacy officers should be breathing a sigh of relief that those faxes sent by mistake to one doctor instead of another, for instance, will not be required to be reported," Simons adds.
Covered entities and BAs may get off the hook on some breaches with good reason, as cited above. But at other times the harm threshold may lead them down the wrong road, misjudging or underrating the impact of the breach.
"The bad news from a privacy compliance perspective is that while the harm threshold approach requires organizations to perform and document a risk assessment in every instance," Borten says, "introducing the concept of a subjective harm threshold can be seen as a big loophole that some organizations will stretch."
Dom Nicastro is a senior managing editor at HCPro, Inc. in Danvers, MA. He edits the Briefings on HIPAA newsletter and manages the HIPAA Update Blog. E-mail him at dnicastro@hcpro.com.
- New Facebook Page Gathers Stories of Medical Harm
- Urologists 'Outraged' Over PSA Test Challenge
- Five Hospitals Share Three Secrets to Improve Knee Surgery Outcomes
- Luxury Hospital Facilities Put Patient Experience First
- Beleaguered Fairview Health CEO to Retire in July
- Heartland Health Joins Mayo Clinic Network
- Challenging Physicians to Help Improve the ED
- Health Insurance Exchanges Put Defined Benefits to the Test
- The Power of Plugged-In Physicians
- For hospitals and insurers, new fervor to cut costs


Comments are moderated. Please be patient.