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.
- Urologists 'Outraged' Over PSA Test Challenge
- New Facebook Page Gathers Stories of Medical Harm
- Luxury Hospital Facilities Put Patient Experience First
- Five Hospitals Share Three Secrets to Improve Knee Surgery Outcomes
- Heartland Health Joins Mayo Clinic Network
- Beleaguered Fairview Health CEO to Retire in July
- Challenging Physicians to Help Improve the ED
- Health Insurance Exchanges Put Defined Benefits to the Test
- For hospitals and insurers, new fervor to cut costs
- The Power of Plugged-In Physicians


Comments are moderated. Please be patient.