Curiosity Killed the Cat and Got 50 Hospital Employees Fired
At Chicago’s Northwestern Hospital, Jussie Smollett, an actor from the TV series “Empire,” was admitted after he was physically attacked. According to reports, he suffered bruises and facial lacerations.
Out of curiosity, over 50 hospital employees, including nurses, decided to check the celebrity's medical records. Many said they didn't go past the name screen but that was enough to be a HIPAA violation. Those individuals lost their jobs.
Anything that you do online in the hospital is trackable. You cannot access the medical records of anyone unless you are involved in that patient's care. Even being only on the face page for any amount of time as little as 17 seconds is a HIPAA violation if you are not involved in the care for that patient.
Audit Trails
Authorities can find your path if you wrongfully access a record because of what's called "audit trails.” The same rules apply if you are changing a medical record such as making a late entry and you will need to properly identify the late entry. Although you may be able to simply replace or add to your prior charting, this can be discovered.
Your employer or an attorney can go through the audit trails to see exactly how the records may have been changed. Cases which might pique an attorney's curiosity, such as a heel ulcer developed overnight and yet all the proper preventative records were checked that they were done in the medical record and sudden changes in condition. In these situations, an attorney may get the audit trail to show that the entries placed in the record were entered late after they knew of the heel ulcer or the change in condition.
Also, be careful when copying and pasting previous notes. Again, those actions can be tracked and the attorney may question whether you actually performed a new assessment.
What is HIPAA?
HIPAA established national standards to protect an individual's medical record as well as other personal health information. Patients' have the right to privacy for their medical records. Any intrusion into the medical records can result in a significant fine to the hospital. Therefore, most facilities have a zero tolerance policy if the privacy rights of any patient are violated. Improperly accessing records could result in termination as this is what happened to more the 50 health care workers at Northwestern.
With medical records and portability information, it is even more important nowadays to be aware of the rules to protect patients' privacy as well as protecting your license.
Privacy and confidentiality also are important when you are conversing with another health care professional outside of the medical area such as in elevators or while having lunch. You never know who may be listening. Even if you avoid using the patient's name, there may enough information revealed to identify the patient.
This is not the first time that a celebrity's medical information has been improperly accessed. Britney Spears was hospitalized in a psychiatric unit when several employees improperly accessed her records. They were all terminated.
Social media is another big issue. All attorneys advise not to post anything, zilch, about work on any of the social media. Again, you can never know all who may be reading your posts or who may even forward that information to other pages.
Violation of HIPAA may result in fines of from $100 to $50,000 per violations and up to $1,500,000.00 a year. Hospitals must designate a HIPAA officer to make sure that the hospital is in compliance.
According to the HIPAA Journal, the average HIPAA data breach costs an organization $5,900,000.00. This is astronomical! No wonder hospitals take this so seriously.
Do your part by never accessing patient information for which you are not authorized to do.
Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).
There was a situation at Wrongway Regional Medical Center were an ancillary employee coded on the medical side. Several employees from the psych division looked up the deceased employee's file, one being an interim supervisor.
Wrongway administration dealt with it by slapping some wrists and making it where the medical and psych computer systems wouldn't be able to communicate.
It's a real bummer because we regularly transfer patients back and forth.
Specializes in Psych (25 years), Medical (15 years).
12 hours ago, Rose_Queen said:
All are entitled to the exact same privacy.
Okay, but here's theoretical situation: Say someone's life stance is as an devoted exhibitionist. HIPAA interferes with that individual's right by enforcing privacy on them. The Supreme Court has ruled that an individual's life stance carries the same weight as another's religious beliefs.
Wouldn't HIPAA be interfering in an individual's constitution right to freely practice their religious belief of exhibitionism by enforcing privacy upon them?
Okay, but here's theoretical situation: Say someone's life stance is as an devoted exhibitionist. HIPAA interferes with that individual's right by enforcing privacy on them. The Supreme Court has ruled that an individual's life stance carries the same weight as another's religious beliefs.
Wouldn't HIPAA be interfering in an individual's constitution right to freely practice their religious belief of exhibitionism by enforcing privacy upon them?
Anybody know?
Is there a lawyer in the house?
Or how about someone whose life stance is irrepressible curiosity!? Shouldn't the workplace accommodate that? It might be covered under the ADA!
Okay, but here's theoretical situation: Say someone's life stance is as an devoted exhibitionist. HIPAA interferes with that individual's right by enforcing privacy on them. The Supreme Court has ruled that an individual's life stance carries the same weight as another's religious beliefs.
Wouldn't HIPAA be interfering in an individual's constitution right to freely practice their religious belief of exhibitionism by enforcing privacy upon them?
Anybody know?
Is there a lawyer in the house?
The RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) of 1993 upholds the Federal Government's right to "significantly burden" someone's religious needs so as long as the government has a substantial interest in doing so. HIPAA would likely fall into the category of substantial interest.
There have been many back and forth cases on a state and federal level from the bakers in Colorado to the marriage license clerk that have had input into the RFRA and the state level of the same law.
Overall there seems to be a balance. The federal government can overrule religious needs when compelled to do so but it cannot compel an individual to act against their religion. That individual can either be removed or recuse themselves from the conflict should they be unable to uphold their duties.
I access charts of patients that aren't mine all the time. It almost always occurs when I am at the nursing station. For example, the dietary aid cannot find the nurse so he/she wants to know if the patient's NPO status was actually discontinued. Sometimes a doctor cannot find his/her patient, so I go in the chart to see if the nurse dropped a note about the patient leaving the unit for a test. Should I stop these practices? I know I am not doing anything wrong, but in 10 years if a judge asked me why I went into that patient's chart if I wasn't assigned to that patient, there is no way I would remember why I did in the first place.
I access charts of patients that aren't mine all the time. It almost always occurs when I am at the nursing station. For example, the dietary aid cannot find the nurse so he/she wants to know if the patient's NPO status was actually discontinued. Sometimes a doctor cannot find his/her patient, so I go in the chart to see if the nurse dropped a note about the patient leaving the unit for a test. Should I stop these practices? I know I am not doing anything wrong, but in 10 years if a judge asked me why I went into that patient's chart if I wasn't assigned to that patient, there is no way I would remember why I did in the first place.
As long as you access the chart for a legitimate reason pertaining to the patient's healthcare, that is fine. Check with your risk manager about putting in an entry "accessed chart to find dietary order for dietary aid" or " accessed chart to notify physician of patient's whereabouts"
Many moons ago, I worked on a women's health unit, inside a large hospital. On our sister unit, L&D, we had a very bad outcome with an older doc, and a stillborn. Many thought it could have been avoided.
Our house sup came up and told everyone -- DO NOT LOOK AT ANYTHING. NOT THE STRIPS, NOT THE CHART, NADA, ZIPPO, ZILCH.
Well, three nurses thought, "they won't know" and looked through the chart and strips anyway.
As long as you access the chart for a legitimate reason pertaining to the patient's healthcare, that is fine. Check with your risk manager about putting in an entry "accessed chart to find dietary order for dietary aid" or " accessed chart to notify physician of patient's whereabouts"
I have never seen this anywhere. Do you mean a specific place to chart that or just put a nursing note. Where I work I also "look" at patients charts for various reasons and like the other poster would not remember in 10 yrs (or probably even 10 days)
But, but, there's a terrible nursing shortage. Haven't you heard?
It depends on where you live. I live in Wyoming, and there 'is' a terrible nursing shortage here. I only wish I lived in a state where there isn't a nursing shortage, or wish some of those nurses would move here.
Davey Do
10,666 Posts
There was a situation at Wrongway Regional Medical Center were an ancillary employee coded on the medical side. Several employees from the psych division looked up the deceased employee's file, one being an interim supervisor.
Wrongway administration dealt with it by slapping some wrists and making it where the medical and psych computer systems wouldn't be able to communicate.
It's a real bummer because we regularly transfer patients back and forth.