Audrey Davis, Andrew Kuder Featured in Q&A Discussion on HIPAA ComplianceTCI SuperCoder July 13, 2020
Audrey Davis and Andrew Kuder, Associates in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, in the firm’s Washington, DC, and Newark offices, respectively, were featured in a Q&A discussion in TCI SuperCoder, titled “Keep a Grip on HIPAA Compliance.” (Read the full version – subscription required.)
Following is an excerpt:
If you’re stumped by the regulatory nuances associated with the Medicare telehealth expansion or the subsequent HIPAA notification of enforcement discretion, you’re not alone. Many healthcare providers are confused by the endless policy revisions and fuzzy timelines to address the public health emergency (PHE). …
In coordination with the Medicare telehealth expansion, the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued a HIPAA notification of enforcement discretion. The agency announced it would “not impose penalties for noncompliance with the regulatory requirements under the HIPAA Rules against covered healthcare providers in connection with the good faith provision of telehealth during the COVID-19 nationwide public health emergency,” OCR said.
Under these eased standards, providers are allowed to utilize non-public-facing technologies like FaceTime and Skype in “good faith” for telehealth visits; however, public-facing technologies like TikTok and Facebook Live, which are not private and can lead easily to the loss of protected health information (PHI), are not permitted. …
“OCR [also] noted in its FAQs that many platforms employ end-to-end encryption and limit access to authorized participants,” explain attorneys Audrey Davis and Andrew Kuder with national law firm Epstein, Becker & Green PC. “In other words, OCR seems to be comfortable enough with the protections offered by these technologies for the time being.”
Davis and Kuder add, “However, it’s unclear if OCR will remain comfortable in the long-term, as it’s too soon to determine the waiver’s risk to patient privacy and security.” …
The enforcement discretion only works for covered providers if they’re abiding in “good faith” by the OCR’s guidelines. Practitioners should try to keep in line with these provisions.
Davis and Kuder advise covered providers to take the following actions:
- Utilize clinical expertise: Exercise professional judgment on a case-by-case basis as to whether telehealth is appropriate for the specific patient under their specific circumstances.
- Manage apps: If use of HIPAA-compliant technology is not possible, use a technology platform included in OCR’s list of “non-public facing” remote communication products in its published FAQs (and, similarly, avoid those technologies OCR identifies as unacceptable).
- Explain the risks: At the beginning of the service, inform the patient of the privacy risks associated with use of the relevant technology.
- Implement IT: If the technology offers any encryption or enhanced privacy settings, ensure those settings are enabled.
- Find a private place: Render telehealth services from private locations and ask that patients locate themselves in a private setting if possible. If the patient cannot be in a completely private location, the provider should speak in a lowered voice and ask that the patient do the same (or ask if the patient would rather reschedule).
- Know states’ laws upfront: Ensure that you are not violating any state licensing laws if rendering services to a patient located in another state. While some of these laws may currently be waived, it is important to check for updated information from the relevant state licensing board prior to rendering services to someone located in another state.