Live data from Hacker News

Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

law.stackexchange.com

71–80 of 150 posts

Re: Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

#71
post #57
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Go to the hospital healthy, come out sick. This isn't whats happening. Being sleep deprived for a day is annoying, but hardly a health issue. I bet most people would rather have doctors respond to you suddenly dropping blood O2 levels to under 90% than not. > (Also, the nurse said nobody sleeps here. Not just the people under observation.) Yes, nobody sleeps because nurses and doctors are all working >14 hour shift…

Actually, sleep deprivation, even for one night, is definitely a health issue. And the only reason it's accepted is because it's so common. It's the modern equivalent of drinking out of lead cups. (And of course a sleep-deprived medical professional is a health hazard to everybody involved. Only a fool thinks otherwise.)

Sleep deprivation is not as dangerous as dying from an acute condition. If you're in the hospital for one night, you're being treated by doctors who want to make sure you're not going to die for the night. If you get admitted for a longer period, it's a different environment altogether. At least this has been my experience.

You get used to the beeping after one night anyway. If not, you can ask the nurse for earplugs or even sleeping pills (although sleeping pills are harder to get).

Re: Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

#73
post #16

HIPAA is sort of a joke to me. My perspective being that of a patient. Any doctor's office just blindly asks you sign a HIPAA authorization release form. Most patients don't realize that you have a choice to "opt out" and not sign it. But even then it doesn't matter because under HIPAA the provider may still choose to share your personal information for their own reasons. Sure, I am doing a lot of "hand waving"- I'm…

HIPAA was never meant to prevent direct communication between clinicians regarding a shared patient's healthcare needs and issues in order to provide the best and safest care possible.

Re: Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

#76
post #68
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about the confidentiality of electronic medical records, not about patient privacy.

If we’re discussing > What is the motivation behind keeping medical records confidential, why do we actually care? A respect for the patient’s privacy is likely going to be one of the driving reasons, if not the primary reason itself.

No, that's not the actual reason! The reason the rule exists is because, when HIPAA was passed, electronic patient health records were a new thing, and they were desired both for cost savings (electronic records as a way to drive administration costs down were a huge thing in the 1990s) and so the USG could combat Medicare fraud. The confidentiality rule was designed to ease the acceptance of electronic records; that's all. That's why the rule refers to e-PHI.

Re: Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

#77
post #16

HIPAA is sort of a joke to me. My perspective being that of a patient. Any doctor's office just blindly asks you sign a HIPAA authorization release form. Most patients don't realize that you have a choice to "opt out" and not sign it. But even then it doesn't matter because under HIPAA the provider may still choose to share your personal information for their own reasons. Sure, I am doing a lot of "hand waving"- I'm…

[deleted]

Re: Why do shared hospital rooms not violate HIPAA?

#78

From the HHS.gov website: The Privacy Rule permits certain incidental uses and disclosures that occur as a by-product of another permissible or required use or disclosure, as long as the covered entity has applied reasonable safeguards and implemented the minimum necessary standard, where applicable, with respect to the primary use or disclosure. See 45 CFR 164.502(a)(1)(iii). An incidental use or disclosure is a sec…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN