Emerging New-Wave Cloud Technology for HIPAA

Join Our Mailing List

Securing Electronic Communication in the Cloud

[By Carol S. Miller BSN MBA PMP]

Carol S. MillerTo help hospitals and health systems comply with burdens of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act [HIPAA] regulations, best practices are emerging for securing all electronic communication – cloud, wireless, and texting –  of protected health information.

These new technologies will continually be evolving with hospitals, providers and patients move to new means of communication.

And so, below is a very brief description of one: cloud solutions.

Cloud Solutions

Cloud solutions are becoming a needed commodity in treating patients today but also present a risk to privacy and security violation.  Despite the advantages of cloud computing, organizations are often hesitant to use it because of concerns about security and compliance.

Specifically, they fear potential unauthorized access to patient data and the accompanying liability and reputation damage resulting from the need to report HIPAA breaches. While these concerns are understandable, a review of data on HIPAA breaches published by the HHS shows that these concerns are misplaced.

In fact, by using a cloud-based service with an appropriate security and compliance infrastructure, a facility can significantly reduce its compliance risk.

***

USB drive

[A.I. and the “SINGULARITY”]*

***

Because HIPAA compliance involves stringent privacy and security protections for electronic protected health information (PHI), many cloud providers are balking at signing new Business-Associate agreements.

Most cloud-technology providers, such as Box and Dropbox, do not include the built-in privacy protections that guarantee HIPAA compliance. Because many cloud storage companies store plaintext data on their servers, PHI is especially vulnerable to breaches and compliance violations.

Note:

The SINGULARITY is that hypothetical moment in time when Artificial Intelligence [AI] will have progressed to the point of a greater-than-human intelligence.

Channel Surfing the ME-P

Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

  • Carol S. Miller; BSN, MBA, PMP
  • ACT IAC Executive Committee Vice Chair at-Large
  • HIMSS NCA Board Member
  • President – Miller Consulting Group
  • 7344 Hooking Road
  • McLean, VA 22101
  • Phone: 703-407-4704
  • Fax: 703-790-3257
  • email: millerconsultgroup@gmail.com

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Product Details

On Physicians Texting [SMS]

Join Our Mailing List 

Some Technical Considerations

By Carol Miller BSN RN MBA PMP [Miller Consulting]

Carol S. Miller

Text (SMS = Short Message Service) Messaging has become nearly ubiquitous on mobile devices. According to one survey, approximately 72 percent of mobile phone users send text messages (TMs).

Clinical medical care is not immune from the trend, and in fact physicians appear to be embracing texting on par with the general population. Another survey found that 73 percent of physicians text other physicians about work.

(Source:  Journal of AHIMA, “HIPAA Compliance for Clinician Texting”, by Adam Green, April 2012)

Advantages

Texting can offer providers numerous advantages for clinical care. It may be the fastest and most efficient means of sending information in a given situation, especially with factors such as background noise, spotty wireless network coverage, lack of access to a desktop or laptop, and a flood of e-mails clogging inboxes.

Further, texting is device neutral—it will work on personal or provider-supplied devices of all shapes and sizes. Because of these advantages, physicians may utilize texting to communicate clinical information, whether authorized to do so or not.

Risks

All forms of communication involve some level of risk. Text messaging merely represents a different set of risks that, like other communication technologies, needs to be managed appropriately to ensure both privacy and security of the information exchanged.

Text messages, like all digital data,  may reside on a mobile device indefinitely, where the information can be exposed to unauthorized third parties due to theft, loss, or recycling of the device. Text messages often can be accessed without any level of authentication, meaning that anyone who has access to the mobile phone may have access to all text messages on the device without the need to enter a password.

***

AA9tsnE

***

Texts also are generally not subject to central monitoring by the IT department. Although text messages communicated wirelessly are usually encrypted by the carrier, interception and decryption of such messages can be done with inexpensive equipment and freely available software (although a substantial level of sophistication is needed.

If text messages are used to make decisions about patient care, then they may be subject to the rights of access and amendment. There is a risk of noncompliance with the privacy rule if the covered entity cannot provide patients with access to or amend such text messages.

The Wireless Association

According to 2012 data from CTIA–The Wireless Association, U.S. citizens alone exchange nearly 200 billion text messages every month. So it’s not surprising that an increasing number of clinicians are using text messaging to exchange clinical information, along with a wide range of other modes — smartphones, pagers, computerized physician order entry, emails, etc. Electronic communication is certainly faster, can be more efficient, enhances clinical collaboration and enables clinicians to focus on patient care. But with these benefits comes an increased risk of security breaches.

(Source:  Clarifying the Confusion about HIPAA – Compliant Texting, by Megan Hardiman and Terry Edwards, May 2013)

Unfortunately, vendor hype about the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act [HIPAA] is causing many hospitals and health systems to implement stop-gap measures that address part — but not all — of a problem. To identify all vulnerabilities, health care leaders need to consider not only text messaging, but all mechanisms by which protected health information in electronic form is transmitted — as well as the security of those mechanisms.

Mobile device-to-mobile device SMS text messages are generally not secure because they lack encryption.  The sender does not know with certainty that his or her message is indeed received by the intended recipient.  In addition, telecommunications vendor/wireless carrier may store the text messages.

Recent HHS guidance indicates text messaging, as a means of communicating PHI, can be permissible under HIPAA depending in large part on the adequacy of the controls used.  A hospital or provider may be approved for texting after performing a risk analysis or implementing a third-party messaging solution that incorporates measures to establish a secure communication platform that will allow texting on approved mobile devices.

***

AA9tvIj

***

The Ponemon Institute

A study reported in Computer World in May 2013 by the Ponemon Institute with 577 healthcare and It professional in facilities that ranged from fewer than 100 beds to over 500 beds stated that fifty-one percent of the respondents felt HIPAA compliance requirements can be a barrier to providing effective patient care.

Specifically HIPAA reduces time available for patient care (85% of the respondents), makes access to electronic patient information difficult (79% of the respondents) and restricts the use of electronic mobile communications (56% of the respondents).

The study stated “respondents agreed that the deficient communications tools currently in use decrease productivity and limit the time doctors have to spend with patients. “ They also stated “they recognized the value of implementing smartphones, text messaging and other modern forms of communications, but cited overly restrictive security policies as a primary reason why these technologies were not used.”

Clinicians in the survey stated that only 45% of each workday is spent with patients; the remaining 55% is spent communicating and collaborating with other clinicians and using the electronic medical record and other clinical IT systems.

Several other statements made were:

  • Because of the need for security, hospitals and other healthcare organizations continue to use older, outdate technology such as pagers, email and facsimile machines. The use of older technology can also delay patient discharges – now taking an average of 102 minutes.
  • The Ponemon Institute estimated that the lengthy discharge process costs the U.S. hospital industry more than $3.189 billion a year in lost revenue, with another $5 billion lost through decrease doctor productivity and use of outdated technology. Secure text messaging could cut discharge time by 50 minutes.

(Source:  Computer World, “HIPAA rules, outdate tech cost U.S. hospitals $3.38 B a year”, by Lucas Mearian, May, 2013)

***

smart phone mobile ME-P

***

Assessment

Several suggestions offered for these preferred mobile devises are:  1) ensure encryption and access to individuals who need to have access; 2) use secure texting applications; and 3) even consider alerting employees with warnings before they send an email or share files that lets them know they are liable for the information sent

Channel Surfing the ME-P

Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.

ABOUT CAROL MILLER; BSN, MBA, PMP millerconsultgroup@gmail.com ACT IAC Executive Committee Vice Chairwoman at-Large HIMSS NCA Board Member [President – Miller Consulting Group] Phone: 703-407-4704 and Fax: 703-790-3257

Ms. Carol S. Miller has an extensive healthcare background in operations, business development and capture in both the public and private sector. Over the last 10 years she has provided management support to projects in the Department of Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, and Department of Defense medical programs. In most recent years, Carol has served as Vice President and Senior Account Executive for NCI Information Systems, Inc., Assistant Vice President at SAIC, and Program Manager at MITRE. She has led the successful capture of large IDIQ/GWAC programs, managed the operations of multiple government contracts, interacted with many government key executives, and increased the new account portfolios for each firm she supported. She earned her MBA from Marymount University; BS in Business from Saint Joseph’s College, and BS in Nursing from the University of Pittsburgh. She is a Certified PMI Project Management Professional (PMP) (PMI PMP) and a Certified HIPAA Professional (CHP), with Top Secret Security clearance issued by the DoD in 2006. Ms. Miller is also a HIMSS Fellow.

Conclusion

How does this relate to emails? Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Product DetailsProduct Details

More on “Meaningful Use” Requirements

Join Our Mailing List

And  …  Its’ Impact on eHRs

Carol Miller RN MBA millerconsultgroup@gmail.com

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009introduced the “Meaningful Use” requirement for EHR systems with three main components:

The Components

1) The use of a certified EHR in a meaningful manner, such as e-prescribing, 2) The use of a certified EHR technology for electronic exchange of health information to improve quality of health care, and 3) The use of a certified EHR technology to submit clinical quality and other measures.

Meaningful Use refers to a set of 15 criteria that medical providers must meet in order to prove that they are using their EHRs as an effective tool in their practice.  There are also 10 additional criteria that are considered a la carte from which only 5 need to be demonstrated by the medical provider.

In total, 20 Meaningful Use criteria must be used within the EHR to qualify for stimulus payments during Stage One of the EHR incentive program.   Each of the criteria were developed and further reviewed by the Office of the National Coordinator [ONC] with public input.

A Five Year TimeLine

Meaningful use will be measured in stages over five years.  Each stage represents a level of adoption.  Many certified EHRS will allow providers to complete all Meaningful Use criteria, whereas others will only certify what is required in the early stages and modify at a later date with any new criteria.

The three stages are:

Stage One:  Essentially, Stage One is using the major functionality of a certified EHR.  This includes documenting set percentages of your visits, diagnoses, prescriptions, immunizations and other relevant health information electronically; using the clinical support tools (warnings and reminders that will be included in a certified EHR); and sharing patient information.  Providers and hospitals must report quality measures and public health information. For providers they must report on 6 clinical quality measures – 3 required core measures and 3 additional measures selected from a set of 38 clinical quality measures.  Eligible hospitals and Critical Care Hospitals (CAHs) must report on all 15 of the clinical quality measures.  Stage One is required in years 2011 and 2012.

Stage Two:  In addition to continuing to use all functionality from Stage One, physicians will be required to use EHRs to send and receive information such as lab orders and results.   Other criteria may be added.  Stage Two is expected to be implemented in 2013.

Stage Three:  This stage will continue fulfilling the criteria from Stages One and Two and will include clinical decisions support for national high priority conditions; emailing patients in a Personal Health Record (PHR); accessing comprehensive patient data; and improving population health.  Stage Three criteria have not been developed to date and the implementation is not expected until 2015.

Assessment

CMS payment penalties for non-compliance to the meaningful use regulations will begin in 2016 with an initial 1% penalty which could escalate to 5% five years later.  Therefore, with these criteria in place, we are likely to see virtually all hospitals attempt to meet the meaningful use criteria to avoid penalty cost.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Buy from Amazon

Learn How to Profit and Thrive in the PP-ACA Era

BOOK FOREWORD / TESTIMONIAL

On the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act

Join Our Mailing List

A Review of GINA – 2008

[By Carol Miller RN MBA]

This Act prohibits the use of genetic information to make health insurance coverage determinations and in employment-related decisions.

GINA supports a patient’s privacy. Forty states have enacted legislation related to genetic discrimination in health insurance and thirty-one states have adopted laws regarding genetic discrimination in the workplace according to the National Human Genome Research Institute.

Assessment

For more info: www.genome.gov

***

UPDATE 2020

Channel Surfing the ME-P

Have you visited our other topic channels? Established to facilitate idea exchange and link our community together, the value of these topics is dependent upon your input. Please take a minute to visit. And, to prevent that annoying spam, we ask that you register. It is fast, free and secure.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details