COVID-19 Outbreak Information Updates (Reboot) [over 150.000,000 US cases (est.), 6,422,520 US hospitilizations, 1,148,691 US deaths.] (5 Viewers)

HIPAA is a source of regular error and misperception in the public and even healthcare professionals.

The key to your quote here is "about an identifiable patient". Where the information shared with public-health agencies or the public is not of the kind that would allow the patient to be identified (e.g. with personal information revealed or in a context where the patient's identity would be obvious from the report), there is no HIPAA privacy issue.

Correct. And with that, releasing said info on an employee would make it "public" to the immediate co-workers of that employee, thus "identifying" them and making it public.

Thats the insane fine line that no one wants to cross.
 
Correct. And with that, releasing said info on an employee would make it "public" to the immediate co-workers of that employee, thus "identifying" them and making it public.

Thats the insane fine line that no one wants to cross.

Yep. My daughter works at Amazon, and the only info they give out is the number of cases at a given warehouse. That's it.
 
Right... It's about protecting identities and personal information.... not suppressing detailed that has the potential promote and protect the public’s health and well-being or aid the public in making informed decisions on their (and their families) health.

But it gets all wrapped up in one "package" and no one wants to spend time and $$$$ defending a HIPAA suit.

If an attorney can convince a judge that releasing the date, the type of test, specific situational data ( like what dept, do they interact w/ kids etc ) was a violation, game over.
 
Here's how it should be reported for example:

We have 5 employees out of approx. 7000 spread among several hundred of different locations, that have tested positive for Covid-19. Three of them tested positive over 2 weeks ago via the blood serology test, and are no longer considered contagions. Two of them have tested positive within the last week via the nasal swab test, and are being quarantined until a negative test result is achieved. All were asymptomatic cases. None of the employees work with kids in classrooms, and none of them work at the same school.

There... some important details I can hang my hat on... No one's personal identifying information was violated or shared... There is no (non-bias) reason to not report it if available.
 
Last edited:
Correct. And with that, releasing said info on an employee would make it "public" to the immediate co-workers of that employee, thus "identifying" them and making it public.

Thats the insane fine line that no one wants to cross.

It's not quite that simple. I think a disclosure can be made to the public in a way that does not identify the patient. Disclosures can be made to co-workers under the legal exceptions for the control of the spread of disease.

If, based on public-health protocols, someone in contact with an infected person or a location where and infected person may have been in a manner that could potentially infect others, information may be disclosed sufficient to allow those impacted individuals to be notified under the relevant public-health protocols.

This certainly applies to co-workers and others at the location. In a school, this would include students - and because students are minors, it would include their parents. The disclosure should not include a patient's specific public health information except to the extent that is minimally needed to take the appropriate action. For example, a notice to co-workers or other impacted people would say that "an employee has tested positive" or something along those lines. Even if those co-workers can identify the employee based on contextual knowledge, the disclosure itself doesn't identify the individual - but the information disclosed is of a minimal quality to advance the interest of a public-health agency's effort to limit the spread of a disease . . . which is a legal exception to HIPAA privacy.
 
Here's how it should be reported for example:

We have 5 employees that have tested positive for Covid-19. Three of them tested positive over 2 weeks ago via the blood serology test, and are no longer considered contagions. Two of them have tested positive within the last week via the nasal swab test, and are being quarantined until a negative test result is achieved. All were asymptomatic. None of the employees work with kids in classrooms, and none of them work at the same school.

There some detail I can hang my hat on... No one's personal information was violated... There is no (non-bias) reason to no report it if available.

Good luck getting companies and organizations to report that though. Until they're mandated to do such, it's not happening imo.
 
It's not quite that simple. I think a disclosure can be made to the public in a way that does not identify the patient. Disclosures can be made to co-workers under the legal exceptions for the control of the spread of disease.

If, based on public-health protocols, someone in contact with an infected person or a location where and infected person may have been in a manner that could potentially infect others, information may be disclosed sufficient to allow those impacted individuals to be notified under the relevant public-health protocols.

This certainly applies to co-workers and others at the location. In a school, this would include students - and because students are minors, it would include their parents. The disclosure should not include a patient's specific public health information except to the extent that is minimally needed to take the appropriate action. For example, a notice to co-workers or other impacted people would say that "an employee has tested positive" or something along those lines. Even if those co-workers can identify the employee based on contextual knowledge, the disclosure itself doesn't identify the individual - but the information disclosed is of a minimal quality to advance the interest of a public-health agency's effort to limit the spread of a disease . . . which is a legal exception to HIPAA privacy.

Quoting because true...
 
Here's how it should be reported for example:

We have 5 employees out of 7000 spread among several hundred of different locations, that have tested positive for Covid-19. Three of them tested positive over 2 weeks ago via the blood serology test, and are no longer considered contagions. Two of them have tested positive within the last week via the nasal swab test, and are being quarantined until a negative test result is achieved. All were asymptomatic cases. None of the employees work with kids in classrooms, and none of them work at the same school.

There... some important details I can hang my hat on... No one's personal identifying information was violated or shared... There is no (non-bias) reason to not report it if available.

I AGREE!!!! but the waters are so muddy, that no entity wants to take on the responsibility of "accidentally" identifying someone.
 
I'm guessing you either have no kids in school or it's been awhile? Dress codes mean very little and teachers have very limited control over kids. It's shocking to me how jr high and high school students are allowed to act. The stories my kids tell me will just make you shake your head. In March when there was talk of closing schools down kids were coughing in each other's faces hoping they would close school. That sound like something you think teachers can keep from happening?
As a 14-year veteran teacher who is starting administration this year, with a 10-year veteran teacher for a wife, and a kid starting 6th grade this year, I can tell you - yes, this is absolutely something teachers can keep from happening. Classroom management is a thing.
 
I will say it again - I don't have any feelings (good or bad) about your or anyone else's ideals... I have no political affiliation, and I don't vote along party lines like some political robot.... I want real factual detailed information, even if it's at the cost of anyone's beliefs or opinions - so I can make informed decisions.

This is not a "political stance"... this should be common in your everyday life.... If it's not, you need to reassess your priorities.

You got valid information. You're choosing to try to discredit that information because it's not what you want.
 
It's not quite that simple. I think a disclosure can be made to the public in a way that does not identify the patient. Disclosures can be made to co-workers under the legal exceptions for the control of the spread of disease.

If, based on public-health protocols, someone in contact with an infected person or a location where and infected person may have been in a manner that could potentially infect others, information may be disclosed sufficient to allow those impacted individuals to be notified under the relevant public-health protocols.

This certainly applies to co-workers and others at the location. In a school, this would include students - and because students are minors, it would include their parents. The disclosure should not include a patient's specific public health information except to the extent that is minimally needed to take the appropriate action. For example, a notice to co-workers or other impacted people would say that "an employee has tested positive" or something along those lines. Even if those co-workers can identify the employee based on contextual knowledge, the disclosure itself doesn't identify the individual - but the information disclosed is of a minimal quality to advance the interest of a public-health agency's effort to limit the spread of a disease . . . which is a legal exception to HIPAA privacy.

Agreed. I said that early on- ALL we are allowed to say is " an employee tested positive" - thats it. I cant discuss it after that. No matter how many of my subordinates pepper me with questions, i have been instructed to gag on it. By our in-house labor attorney.

Trust me, i was one of the ones in the meeting wanting as much info to be shared as humanly possible because of that exact reason ( maintaining the health of not only me and my immediate family- but co-workers as well ) Unfortunately i was told that ALL im allowed to say is "someone tested positive".

I dont know how we are to combat this virus when details cannot be shared other than "someone is positive" .

its nuts.
 
I AGREE!!!! but the waters are so muddy, that no entity wants to take on the responsibility of "accidentally" identifying someone.

I know you do.... But No... they are not muddy... and I gave an example of why they are not....

There are a million reasons to report it like this... and one reason not to. This is not difficult.

We'll just agree to disagree from here to move the thread along. Thanks for the discussion.
 
I AGREE!!!! but the waters are so muddy, that no entity wants to take on the responsibility of "accidentally" identifying someone.

I don't think the legal exposure is nearly as great as you're imagining - the waters aren't that muddy in a public-health emergency regarding an infectious disease. The covered entity can (and probably must at this point) provide the information to the public-health agency. Other notification protocols are triggered including notification of those reasonably in contact with the individual or the location where the individual may have been.

Media disclosures are generally ill-advised, but where public interest is amplified, I think media disclosures can be made in a way that doesn't disclose patient health information in a way that identifies any particular patient. I think a school system can disclose that a positive test or a number of positive tests have prompted a response.
 
Clorox said that they can't keep up with demand and the shortage will last into 2021

I wish people would go back to being unclean so I can have my stock back :) With 2 little ones, they were so convenient.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom