It's fairly common for hospitals to give any physician on staff access to any patient images they want to look at, just like a clinical employee. However, there are/should be legally binding documents in place that prohibit access outside the scope of treatment and healthcare operations.
I think imaging centers and physician groups tend to be more restrictive because they often don't have the legally binding documents in place to constrain inappropriate access and protect themselves legally in the event that it occurs.
If this is an important referral source and you're so inclined, you could probably have a healthcare lawyer draw up an appropriate agreement to permit access to any patient with whom the physician has a current doctor/patient relationship as necessary to facilitate treatment, along with appropriate legal safeguards against improper access.
------------------------------
David Smith FACMPE
Executive Director
United Imaging Consultants
Mission KS
(785) 393-8387
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 01-17-2019 14:16
From: Robert Still
Subject: Referring Physician Imaging Access
Rebecca,
Here is language from the US Office of Civil Rights regarding access by physicians to Private Healthcare Information (PHI). I believe your answer to the referring physician regarding "total access" to PHI is in this information.
The Privacy Rule permits - but does not require - a covered entity to disclose PHI to another covered entity for treatment purposes. OCR questions whether covered entities should be required to disclose PHI to other covered entities for care coordination, and if so, what time frame should apply for such disclosures. OCR questions whether the time period should be 30 days or less. OCR seeks information on the burdens (specifically costs) that covered entities may incur if the Privacy Rule requires covered entities to make these disclosures.
The Privacy Rule also limits the amount of PHI covered entities may share for care coordination purposes to a limited data set or such other minimum amount of information necessary to achieve the permitted purpose of the disclosure (referred to as the "minimum necessary rule"). Only disclosures to a health care provider for treatment, upon the request of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, upon the request of the patient, pursuant to an authorization, required by law, or otherwise required for compliance with the Privacy Rule are excluded from the minimum necessary rule. OCR questions whether excluding disclosures for care coordination purposes from the minimum necessary rule could enhance care coordination among health care providers and other involved caregivers, such as family members.
Robert T. Still, FRBMA
Executive Director
M: 717.475.6079
bob.still@rbma.org
9990 Fairfax Blvd., Suite 430 | Fairfax, VA 22030
Direct: 703-621-3363 | Main: 888-224-7262 | Fax: 703-621-3356 | www.rbma.org
Renew your RBMA membership for 2019 and register to attend 2019 PaRADigm, April 14-17, 2019, at The Broadmoor in Colorado Springs, Colo.
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may containconfidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Original Message------
I am the manager of a stand-alone Imaging Center. We allow referring physicians access to their patient's imaging/reports after they complete an access authorization form. I have one physician that wants complete access to our system. He says that our facility is the only center that will not allow him this type of access. Has anyone else ran into a similar situation, and what did you do to not break compliance?
------------------------------
Rebecca Stemm
Practice Manager
Camelot Radiology Associates, Ltd.
Rockford IL
(815) 519-2600
------------------------------