Topic: Discuss the duties, responsibilities and rights of a provider and the providers’ patient under the EMTALA and HIPAA statutes under the following fact scenario: Patient presents to an emergency department conscious, but with extreme chest pain, and requests assistance. Emergency room personnel can converse with the patient but the patient is in distress. Emergency room physicians have access to the patient’s records through a Regional Health Information Exchange.
Duties, Responsibilities and Rights of the Provider
Under EMTALA
EMTALA applies to the hospitals or providers that get reimbursed by Medicare. Almost every hospital or provider accepts Medicare in the United States. Under the EMTALA statues, the provider has a duty to render an appropriate medical screening examination to the patient in distress and necessary treatment or reasonable care to stabilize the patient’s emergency medical condition. If the patient’s chest pain is not determined as an emergency medical condition based on an appropriate examination, no further obligation is imposed on the provider by EMTALA. The same examination or procedure should be applied to all patients with similar circumstances. If the patient declines an appropriate medical screening examination or treatment, the provider is required to document the refused examination or treatment and make reasonable efforts to obtain a written informed refusal.
The provider should have written emergency medical procedures and policies in
. HIPAA privacy rules are complicated and extensive, and set forth guidelines to be followed by health care providers and other covered entities such as insurance carriers and by consumers. HIPAA is very specific in its requirements regarding the release of information, but is not as specific when it comes to the manner in which training and policies are developed and delivered within the health care industry. This paper will discuss how HIPAA affects a patient's access to their medical records, how and under what circumstances personal health information can be released to other entities for purposes
In the health care business, there are certain standards and laws that have been put in place to protect our patients and their personal health information. When a health care facility fails to protect their patient’s confidential information, the US Government may get involved and facilities may be forced to pay huge sums of money in fines, and risk damaging their reputation.
Since the development of the EMTALA Act in 1986, any individual which presents to the emergency department, must be accessed and triaged by qualified medical personnel. (www.cms.gov) Individuals are aware that if they present to the emergency department, regardless if it is for just a tooth ache or a major illness like a heart attack, they will have to be treated. “This mandate does not extend to private physician offices, however, which creates an incentive for those without the means to pay for care to
In 1986, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) was enacted. The federal government enacted the law to provide everyone with access to emergency medical care, even for those unable to pay. EMTALA declared that any individual who enters a “qualifying hospital” is entitled to an “appropriate” medical examination to determine if an “emergency medical condition” is present. The individual cannot be “transferred” until the “emergency medical condition” is “stabilized.” Only if the individual cannot be “stabilized,” an “appropriate transfer” may be performed. Hospitals must accept
Discuss what is required to disclose patient information to family members, friends, and when ordered by courts or government
Providing information to patients or staff who have questions about HIPAA and their privacy protections
The filing of the complaint must be completed within 72 hours of the transfer (Sally Austin, 2011). As a result of this, it has been difficult to see whether or not EMTALA has truly been successfully implemented and effective (Sara Rosenbaum, 2012). Another disadvantage is that EMTALA only requires hospitals to treat “true emergencies”, which are subjective in nature. The last revisions in 2003 for EMTALA by policymakers and CMS limited EMTALA to only patients that arrived to the emergency department, not to other areas of the hospital, such as a doctor’s office appointment or outpatient surgery (Sara Rosenbaum, 2012). Another negative consequence of EMTALA that is not addressed by the law is that emergency department physicians can still be held liable and face malpractice issues by uninsured patients (Singer, 2014). There have been legislative proposals by members of Congress that are working to change this to include physicians as members of the Public Health Services, which would address these concerns (Singer, 2014). These hesitations by physicians has forced some hospitals to close their emergency departments in California to avoid these financial consequences of lawsuits (Friedman, 2011).
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was passed by congress in 1996, and helps to ensure the privacy and security of Electronic Health Records (EHR's). By following the rules and regulations set forth under HIPAA, we can ensure the safety of patients' EHR's. We are responsible for protecting patients' records, and there are many measures we can take in order do this. Firstly, we must always keep patients' health information private. This means no discussing the records with people that are not authorized to know, and even then, we should only disclose the minimum necessary amount of information possible. For covered entities, we must designate a privacy and security officer to ensure the privacy
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) was enacted in 1986 as a part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) of 1985. EMTALA was enacted to prevent hospitals with Emergency Departments from refusing to treat or transferring patients with emergency medical conditions (EMC) due to an inability to pay for their services. This act also applies to satellite locations whom advertise titles such as “Immediate Care” or “Urgent Care,” and all other facilities where one-third of their patient intake are walk-ins. Several rules and regulations to this act have been established and it has become a very serious piece of legislation and health
HIPAA and HITECH Act help address several problems associated with inappropriate use of healthcare information by authorized users. HIPAA requires minimum necessary infor-mation to be released while HITECH goes into a little further detail but still to release minimum necessary information. Several different organizations need to define how they go about han-dling inappropriate use of information. A guideline must be set within the organization on who will have access to the information and how it is disbursed to other healthcare organizations re-questing records.
1. Under HIPAA, are you legally allowed to view this patient’s medical information? Why or why not?
Any patient that is seen by a physician within the United States is to be protected by the “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act” or HIPAA, which was passed into law in 1996 (Jani, 2009). All health care facilities dealing with any protected health information (PHI) are to ensure that all physical/electronic processes are safeguarded from any third party entity or unauthorized personnel according to HIPAA. All health care data to include any medical insurance
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) passed in 1986 and it requires hospitals to provide care to anyone needing emergency healthcare treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. It further stated Participating
The ethical right for individuals to have access to health care already has a form of legal binding within the United States as seen in the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. “In 1986, Congress passed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), which forbids Medicare-participating hospitals from “dumping” patients out of emergency departments” (Pozgar, 2010, p. 221). The act provides that:
Thus, emergency physicians cannot rely on earned trust or on prior knowledge of the patient's condition, values, or wishes regarding medical treatment. The patient's willingness to seek emergency care and to trust the physician is based on institutional and professional assurances rather than on an established personal relationship. Fourth, emergency physicians practice in an institutional setting, the hospital emergency department, and in close working relationships with other physicians, nurses, emergency medical technicians, and other health care professionals. Thus, emergency physicians must understand and respect institutional regulations and inter-professional norms of conduct. Fifth, in the United States, emergency physicians have been given a unique social role and responsibility to act as health care providers of last resort for many patients who have no other feasible access to care. Sixth, emergency physicians have a societal duty to render emergency aid outside their normal health care setting when such intervention may save life or limb. Finally, by virtue of their broad expertise and training, emergency physicians are expected to be a resource for the community in pre-hospital care, disaster management, toxicology, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, public health, injury control, and related areas. All of these special circumstances shape the