Practice Management

​​Good afternoon,

We are beginning to see attorneys requesting patient medical records and including information from the HITECH act stating that we can only charge them up to $6.50 for this service, and they also want to include affadavits in that fee.

In reveiwing the HITECH act it discusses the limitations on fees that can be charged to individuals.  The rules goes further to state that the fee limits apply when an individual "directs a covered entity to send the PHI to a third party".  It also states that, "In contrast, third parties often will directly request PHI from a covered entity and submit a written HIPAA authorization from the individual (or relay on another permission in the Privacy Rule) for that disclosure.  Where the third party is initiating a request for PHI on its own behalf, with the individual's HIPAA authorization (or pursuant to another permissible disclosure provision int he Privacy Rule), the access fee limnitations do not apply.  However, as described above, where the third party is forwarding - on behalf and at the direction of the individual - the individual's access request for a covered entitiy to direct a copy of the individual's PHI to the htird party, the fee limitations apply."

Has anyone else encountered this and obtained legal counsel on what it really means?  I don't believe the rules considered this when they were written.  Can we bill attorneys the medial records fees established within each state, or are we truly limited to the $6,50 maximum that we could charge to an individual patient?

And, if this $6.50 truly applies to requests for medical records from attorneys, does the same apply to affadavits?  Subpeonas?

I look forwad to hearing what guidance others have received on this issue.


------------------------------
Cindy Pittmon RCC, CHBME, FRBMA
President, CEO
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(903) 663-4800
------------------------------

Original Message------

​​Good afternoon,

We are beginning to see attorneys requesting patient medical records and including information from the HITECH act stating that we can only charge them up to $6.50 for this service, and they also want to include affadavits in that fee.

In reveiwing the HITECH act it discusses the limitations on fees that can be charged to individuals.  The rules goes further to state that the fee limits apply when an individual "directs a covered entity to send the PHI to a third party".  It also states that, "In contrast, third parties often will directly request PHI from a covered entity and submit a written HIPAA authorization from the individual (or relay on another permission in the Privacy Rule) for that disclosure.  Where the third party is initiating a request for PHI on its own behalf, with the individual's HIPAA authorization (or pursuant to another permissible disclosure provision int he Privacy Rule), the access fee limnitations do not apply.  However, as described above, where the third party is forwarding - on behalf and at the direction of the individual - the individual's access request for a covered entitiy to direct a copy of the individual's PHI to the htird party, the fee limitations apply."

Has anyone else encountered this and obtained legal counsel on what it really means?  I don't believe the rules considered this when they were written.  Can we bill attorneys the medial records fees established within each state, or are we truly limited to the $6,50 maximum that we could charge to an individual patient?

And, if this $6.50 truly applies to requests for medical records from attorneys, does the same apply to affadavits?  Subpeonas?

I look forwad to hearing what guidance others have received on this issue.


------------------------------
Cindy Pittmon RCC, CHBME, FRBMA
President, CEO
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(903) 663-4800
------------------------------

Original Message------

​​Good afternoon,

We are beginning to see attorneys requesting patient medical records and including information from the HITECH act stating that we can only charge them up to $6.50 for this service, and they also want to include affadavits in that fee.

In reveiwing the HITECH act it discusses the limitations on fees that can be charged to individuals.  The rules goes further to state that the fee limits apply when an individual "directs a covered entity to send the PHI to a third party".  It also states that, "In contrast, third parties often will directly request PHI from a covered entity and submit a written HIPAA authorization from the individual (or relay on another permission in the Privacy Rule) for that disclosure.  Where the third party is initiating a request for PHI on its own behalf, with the individual's HIPAA authorization (or pursuant to another permissible disclosure provision int he Privacy Rule), the access fee limnitations do not apply.  However, as described above, where the third party is forwarding - on behalf and at the direction of the individual - the individual's access request for a covered entitiy to direct a copy of the individual's PHI to the htird party, the fee limitations apply."

Has anyone else encountered this and obtained legal counsel on what it really means?  I don't believe the rules considered this when they were written.  Can we bill attorneys the medial records fees established within each state, or are we truly limited to the $6,50 maximum that we could charge to an individual patient?

And, if this $6.50 truly applies to requests for medical records from attorneys, does the same apply to affadavits?  Subpeonas?

I look forwad to hearing what guidance others have received on this issue.


------------------------------
Cindy Pittmon RCC, CHBME, FRBMA
President, CEO
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(903) 663-4800
------------------------------

I work with Cindy and was wondering if anyone know of an attorney they are familiar with and could recommend to provide guidance to our team processing these HITECH requests?  Any recommendations are appreciated.  Thank you.

------------------------------
Lindsey Wynn
Human Resources and Organizational Development Manager
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(9030 663-4800
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-08-2018 18:44
From: Wayne Baldwin
Subject: PHI and attorney requests

Subpoenas are not a request from the patient and are governed by state or federal law depending on whether the action is pending in state or federal court.  

An affidavit is not an existing medical record, but rather a document that is requested after the fact as part of litigation.

Trusted to provide expert and caring radiology service for over 50 years

Wayne Baldwin

CEO

(805) 879-7577

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail  may contain information that is confidential, privileged, proprietary, or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message, any part of it, or any attachments. If you have received this message in error, please delete this message and any attachments from your system without reading the content and notify the sender immediately of the inadvertent transmission. There is no intent on the part of the sender to waive any privilege that may attach to this communication. Thank you for your cooperation.

Original Message------

​​Good afternoon,

We are beginning to see attorneys requesting patient medical records and including information from the HITECH act stating that we can only charge them up to $6.50 for this service, and they also want to include affadavits in that fee.

In reveiwing the HITECH act it discusses the limitations on fees that can be charged to individuals.  The rules goes further to state that the fee limits apply when an individual "directs a covered entity to send the PHI to a third party".  It also states that, "In contrast, third parties often will directly request PHI from a covered entity and submit a written HIPAA authorization from the individual (or relay on another permission in the Privacy Rule) for that disclosure.  Where the third party is initiating a request for PHI on its own behalf, with the individual's HIPAA authorization (or pursuant to another permissible disclosure provision int he Privacy Rule), the access fee limnitations do not apply.  However, as described above, where the third party is forwarding - on behalf and at the direction of the individual - the individual's access request for a covered entitiy to direct a copy of the individual's PHI to the htird party, the fee limitations apply."

Has anyone else encountered this and obtained legal counsel on what it really means?  I don't believe the rules considered this when they were written.  Can we bill attorneys the medial records fees established within each state, or are we truly limited to the $6,50 maximum that we could charge to an individual patient?

And, if this $6.50 truly applies to requests for medical records from attorneys, does the same apply to affadavits?  Subpeonas?

I look forwad to hearing what guidance others have received on this issue.


------------------------------
Cindy Pittmon RCC, CHBME, FRBMA
President, CEO
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(903) 663-4800
------------------------------

Original Message------

I work with Cindy and was wondering if anyone know of an attorney they are familiar with and could recommend to provide guidance to our team processing these HITECH requests?  Any recommendations are appreciated.  Thank you.

------------------------------
Lindsey Wynn
Human Resources and Organizational Development Manager
Acclaim Radiology Management
Longview TX
(9030 663-4800
------------------------------