ooops, I didn't mean to send that to you

[china mom]

It is my understanding that HIPAA is to protect "individuals" from others knowing about their physical problems. Unless names are used the war stories are just scenarios about events not identifying a specific individual and not a violation. There is a huge difference between that and giving out information about a specific person. If it is specific than it is a violation.

True but part of my lesson to the new hires is that we are a rural community so when you tell a story, there is a very good chance that people will figure out who you are talking about or will repeat the story to someone who knows who you are talking about.

You talk about the call where the teenager lost his leg and we literally only have one one legged teenager it he county, you did give personal information.

 

[goofyernmost]

True but part of my lesson to the new hires is that we are a rural community so when you tell a story, there is a very good chance that people will figure out who you are talking about or will repeat the story to someone who knows who you are talking about.

You talk about the call where the teenager lost his leg and we literally only have one one legged teenager it he county, you did give personal information.

True and that comes under HIPAA because that is specific information that can be traced. How often would that apply to a big city. It also becomes somewhat of a gray area because, with your example about the lost leg, if the person that receives that information knows who they are talking about than they already know about the lost leg. It's hardly a secret. Individual information other than about losing the lost would be a violation. Individual discretion is required, but the story about a non-specific individual is not automatically a violation.

 

[china mom]

True and that comes under HIPAA because that is specific information that can be traced. How often would that apply to a big city. It also becomes somewhat of a gray area because, with your example about the lost leg, if the person that receives that information knows who they are talking about than they already know about the lost leg. It's hardly a secret. Individual information other than about losing the lost would be a violation. Individual discretion is required, but the story about a non-specific individual is not automatically a violation.

100%. In my example, there would be other confidential information about the care received during the incident that would make it HIPAA but the obvious missing leg would not be a violation in itself.

And, you are correct that this would not likely be an issue in a more populous area. This is why I emphasized it to my new hires. Many are form an area where everyone didn't know everyone else.

 

[Kathryn Merteuil]

That's so weird! I received a text last night at like 2:30 asking... "Mary, did. you get home safely"?

I looked up the area code and it said it was from Los Angeles. I live nowhere near Los Angeles (I live in the midwest). I just ignored it. I am figuring that it is some attempt to see if my phone number is "responsive". Besides, my name is not Mary

 

[fla4fun]

If I know the person well, I just text a question mark and they usually understand what I’m telling them. Otherwise, if it looks like something important I sent a quick text like “I believe this message was for someone else.” If it doesn’t appear to be anything urgent, for example, a one word text like Okay or Sure, I just ignore it.