Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA; Pub.L. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936, enacted August 21, 1996) was enacted by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996. It was originally sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. Nancy Kassebaum (R-Kan.). Title I of HIPAA protects health insurance coverage for workers and their families when they change or lose their jobs. Title II of HIPAA, known as the Administrative Simplification (AS) provisions, requires the establishment of national standards for electronic health care transactions and national identifiers for providers, health insurance plans, and employers.[1]

The Administration Simplification provisions also address the security and privacy of health data. The standards are meant to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the nation's health care system by encouraging the widespread use of electronic data interchange in the U.S. health care system.

Contents

Title I: Health Care Access, Portability, and Renewability

Title I of HIPAA regulates the availability and breadth of group health plans and certain individual health insurance policies. It amended the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code.

Title I also limits restrictions that a group health plan can place on benefits for preexisting conditions. Group health plans may refuse to provide benefits relating to preexisting conditions for a period of 12 months after enrollment in the plan or 18 months in the case of late enrollment.[2] However, individuals may reduce this exclusion period if they had group health plan coverage or health insurance prior to enrolling in the plan. Title I allows individuals to reduce the exclusion period by the amount of time that they had "creditable coverage" prior to enrolling in the plan and after any "significant breaks" in coverage.[3] "Creditable coverage" is defined quite broadly and includes nearly all group and individual health plans, Medicare, and Medicaid.[4] A "significant break" in coverage is defined as any 63 day period without any creditable coverage.[5]

Some health care plans are exempted from Title I requirements, such as long-term health plans and limited-scope plans such as dental or vision plans that are offered separately from the general health plan. However, if such benefits are part of the general health plan, then HIPAA still applies to such benefits. For example, if the new plan offers dental benefits, then it must count creditable continuous coverage under the old health plan towards any of its exclusion periods for dental benefits.

An alternate method of calculating creditable continuous coverage is available to the health plan under Title I. That is, 5 categories of health coverage can be considered separately, including dental and vision coverage. Anything not under those 5 categories must use the general calculation (e.g., the beneficiary may be counted with 18 months of general coverage, but only 6 months of dental coverage, because the beneficiary did not have a general health plan that covered dental until 6 months prior to the application date). Since limited-coverage plans are exempt from HIPAA requirements, the odd case exists in which the applicant to a general group health plan cannot obtain certificates of creditable continuous coverage for independent limited-scope plans such as dental to apply towards exclusion periods of the new plan that does include those coverages.

Hidden exclusion periods are not valid under Title I (e.g., "The accident, to be covered, must have occurred while the beneficiary was covered under this exact same health insurance contract"). Such clauses must not be acted upon by the health plan and also must be re-written so that they comply with HIPAA.

To illustrate, suppose someone enrolls in a group health plan on January 1, 2006. This person had previously been insured from January 1, 2004 until February 1, 2005 and from August 1, 2005 until December 31, 2005. To determine how much coverage can be credited against the exclusion period in the new plan, start at the enrollment date and count backwards until you reach a significant break in coverage. So, the five months of coverage between August 1, 2005 and December 31, 2005 clearly counts against the exclusion period. But the period without insurance between February 1, 2005 and August 1, 2005 is greater than 63 days. Thus, this is a significant break in coverage, and any coverage prior to it cannot be deducted from the exclusion period. So, this person could deduct five months from his or her exclusion period, reducing the exclusion period to seven months. Hence, Title I requires that any preexisting condition begin to be covered on August 1.

Title II: Preventing Health Care Fraud and Abuse; Administrative Simplification; Medical Liability Reform

Title II of HIPAA defines numerous offenses relating to health care and sets civil and criminal penalties for them. It also creates several programs to control fraud and abuse within the health care system.[6][7][8] However, the most significant provisions of Title II are its Administrative Simplification rules. Title II requires the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to draft rules aimed at increasing the efficiency of the health care system by creating standards for the use and dissemination of health care information.

These rules apply to "covered entities" as defined by HIPAA and the HHS. Covered entities include health plans, health care clearinghouses, such as billing services and community health information systems, and health care providers that transmit health care data in a way that is regulated by HIPAA.[9][10]

Per the requirements of Title II, the HHS has promulgated five rules regarding Administrative Simplification: the Privacy Rule, the Transactions and Code Sets Rule, the Security Rule, the Unique Identifiers Rule, and the Enforcement Rule.

Privacy Rule

The effective compliance date of the Privacy Rule was April 14, 2003 with a one-year extension for certain "small plans". The HIPAA Privacy Rule regulates the use and disclosure of Protected Health Information (PHI) held by "covered entities" (generally, health care clearinghouses, employer sponsored health plans, health insurers, and medical service providers that engage in certain transactions.)[11] By regulation, the Department of Health and Human Services extended the HIPAA privacy rule to independent contractors of covered entities who fit within the definition of "business associates".[12] PHI is any information held by a covered entity which concerns health status, provision of health care, or payment for health care that can be linked to an individual.[13] This is interpreted rather broadly and includes any part of an individual's medical record or payment history. Covered entities must disclose PHI to the individual within 30 days upon request.[14] They also must disclose PHI when required to do so by law, such as reporting suspected child abuse to state child welfare agencies.[15]

A covered entity may disclose PHI to facilitate treatment, payment, or health care operations,[16] or if the covered entity has obtained authorization from the individual.[17] However, when a covered entity discloses any PHI, it must make a reasonable effort to disclose only the minimum necessary information required to achieve its purpose.[18]

The Privacy Rule gives individuals the right to request that a covered entity correct any inaccurate PHI.[19] It also requires covered entities to take reasonable steps to ensure the confidentiality of communications with individuals.[20] For example, an individual can ask to be called at his or her work number, instead of home or cell phone number.

The Privacy Rule requires covered entities to notify individuals of uses of their PHI. Covered entities must also keep track of disclosures of PHI and document privacy policies and procedures.[21] They must appoint a Privacy Official and a contact person[22] responsible for receiving complaints and train all members of their workforce in procedures regarding PHI.[23]

An individual who believes that the Privacy Rule is not being upheld can file a complaint with the Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR).[24][25] However, according to the Wall Street Journal, the OCR has a long backlog and ignores most complaints. "Complaints of privacy violations have been piling up at the Department of Health and Human Services. Between April of 2003 and November of 2006, the agency fielded 23,886 complaints related to medical-privacy rules, but it has not yet taken any enforcement actions against hospitals, doctors, insurers or anyone else for rule violations. A spokesman for the agency says it has closed three-quarters of the complaints, typically because it found no violation or after it provided informal guidance to the parties involved."[26] However, in July 2011, UCLA agreed to pay $865,500 in a settlement regarding potential HIPAA violations. An HHS Office for Civil Rights investigation showed from 2005 to 2008 unauthorized employees, repeatedly and without legitimate cause, looked at the electronic protected health information of numerous UCLAHS patients.[27]

Transactions and Code Sets Rule

The HIPAA/EDI provision was scheduled to take effect from October 16, 2003 with a one-year extension for certain "small plans". However, due to widespread confusion and difficulty in implementing the rule, CMS granted a one-year extension to all parties. On January 1, 2012 the newest version 5010 becomes effective, replacing the version 4010.[28] This allows for the larger field size of ICD-10-CM as well as other improvements.

After July 1, 2005 most medical providers that file electronically did have to file their electronic claims using the HIPAA standards in order to be paid.

Key EDI(X12) transactions used for HIPAA compliance are:

EDI Health Care Claim Transaction set (837) is used to submit health care claim billing information, encounter information, or both, except for retail pharmacy claims (see EDI Retail Pharmacy Claim Transaction). It can be sent from providers of health care services to payers, either directly or via intermediary billers and claims clearinghouses. It can also be used to transmit health care claims and billing payment information between payers with different payment responsibilities where coordination of benefits is required or between payers and regulatory agencies to monitor the rendering, billing, and/or payment of health care services within a specific health care/insurance industry segment.

For example, a state mental health agency may mandate all healthcare claims, Providers and health plans who trade professional (medical) health care claims electronically must use the 837 Health Care Claim: Professional standard to send in claims. As there are many different business applications for the Health Care claim, there can be slight derivations to cover off claims involving unique claims such as for Institutions, Professionals, Chiropractors, and Dentists etc.

EDI Retail Pharmacy Claim Transaction (NCPDP Telecommunications Standard version 5.1) is used to submit retail pharmacy claims to payers by health care professionals who dispense medications, either directly or via intermediary billers and claims clearinghouses. It can also be used to transmit claims for retail pharmacy services and billing payment information between payers with different payment responsibilities where coordination of benefits is required or between payers and regulatory agencies to monitor the rendering, billing, and/or payment of retail pharmacy services within the pharmacy health care/insurance industry segment.

EDI Health Care Claim Payment/Advice Transaction Set (835) can be used to make a payment, send an Explanation of Benefits (EOB), send an Explanation of Payments (EOP) remittance advice, or make a payment and send an EOP remittance advice only from a health insurer to a health care provider either directly or via a financial institution.

EDI Benefit Enrollment and Maintenance Set (834) can be used by employers, unions, government agencies, associations or insurance agencies to enroll members to a payer. The payer is a healthcare organization that pays claims, administers insurance or benefit or product. Examples of payers include an insurance company, health care professional (HMO), preferred provider organization (PPO), government agency (Medicaid, Medicare etc.) or any organization that may be contracted by one of these former groups.

EDI Payroll Deducted and other group Premium Payment for Insurance Products (820) is a transaction set which can be used to make a premium payment for insurance products. It can be used to order a financial institution to make a payment to a payee.

EDI Health Care Eligibility/Benefit Inquiry (270) is used to inquire about the health care benefits and eligibility associated with a subscriber or dependent.

EDI Health Care Eligibility/Benefit Response (271) is used to respond to a request inquire about the health care benefits and eligibility associated with a subscriber or dependent.

EDI Health Care Claim Status Request (276) This transaction set can be used by a provider, recipient of health care products or services or their authorized agent to request the status of a health care claim.

EDI Health Care Claim Status Notification (277) This transaction set can be used by a health care payer or authorized agent to notify a provider, recipient or authorized agent regarding the status of a health care claim or encounter, or to request additional information from the provider regarding a health care claim or encounter. This transaction set is not intended to replace the Health Care Claim Payment/Advice Transaction Set (835) and therefore, is not used for account payment posting. The notification is at a summary or service line detail level. The notification may be solicited or unsolicited.

EDI Health Care Service Review Information (278) This transaction set can be used to transmit health care service information, such as subscriber, patient, demographic, diagnosis or treatment data for the purpose of request for review, certification, notification or reporting the outcome of a health care services review.

EDI Functional Acknowledgement Transaction Set (997) this transaction set can be used to define the control structures for a set of acknowledgments to indicate the results of the syntactical analysis of the electronically encoded documents. Although it is not specifically named in the HIPAA Legislation or Final Rule, it is necessary for X12 transaction set processing . The encoded documents are the transaction sets, which are grouped in functional groups, used in defining transactions for business data interchange. This standard does not cover the semantic meaning of the information encoded in the transaction sets.

Security Rule

The Final Rule on Security Standards was issued on February 20, 2003. It took effect on April 21, 2003 with a compliance date of April 21, 2005 for most covered entities and April 21, 2006 for "small plans". The Security Rule complements the Privacy Rule. While the Privacy Rule pertains to all Protected Health Information (PHI) including paper and electronic, the Security Rule deals specifically with Electronic Protected Health Information (EPHI). It lays out three types of security safeguards required for compliance: administrative, physical, and technical. For each of these types, the Rule identifies various security standards, and for each standard, it names both required and addressable implementation specifications. Required specifications must be adopted and administered as dictated by the Rule. Addressable specifications are more flexible. Individual covered entities can evaluate their own situation and determine the best way to implement addressable specifications. Some privacy advocates have argued that this "flexibility" may provide too much latitude to covered entities. [29] The standards and specifications are as follows:

Unique Identifiers Rule (National Provider Identifier)

HIPAA covered entities such as providers completing electronic transactions, healthcare clearinghouses, and large health plans, must use only the National Provider Identifier (NPI) to identify covered healthcare providers in standard transactions by May 23, 2007. Small health plans must use only the NPI by May 23, 2008.

Effective from May 2006 (May 2007 for small health plans), all covered entities using electronic communications (e.g., physicians, hospitals, health insurance companies, and so forth) must use a single new NPI. The NPI replaces all other identifiers used by health plans, Medicare, Medicaid, and other government programs. However, the NPI does not replace a provider's DEA number, state license number, or tax identification number. The NPI is 10 digits (may be alphanumeric), with the last digit being a checksum. The NPI cannot contain any embedded intelligence; in other words, the NPI is simply a number that does not itself have any additional meaning. The NPI is unique and national, never re-used, and except for institutions, a provider usually can have only one. An institution may obtain multiple NPIs for different "subparts" such as a free-standing cancer center or rehab facility.

Enforcement Rule

On February 16, 2006, HHS issued the Final Rule regarding HIPAA enforcement. It became effective on March 16, 2006. The Enforcement Rule sets civil money penalties for violating HIPAA rules and establishes procedures for investigations and hearings for HIPAA violations; however, its deterrent effects seem to be negligible with few prosecutions for violations.[30]

HITECH Act: Privacy Requirements

Subtitle D of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act), enacted as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, addresses the privacy and security concerns associated with the electronic transmission of health information.

This subtitle extends the complete Privacy and Security Provisions of HIPAA to business associates of covered entities. This includes the extension of newly updated civil and criminal penalties to business associates. These changes are also required to be included in any business associate agreements with covered entities. On November 30, 2009, the regulations associated with the new enhancements to HIPAA enforcement took effect.[31]

Another significant change brought about in Subtitle D of the HITECH Act, is the new breach notification requirements. This imposes new notification requirements on covered entities, business associates, vendors of personal health records (PHR) and related entities if a breach of unsecured protected health information (PHI) occurs. On April 27, 2009, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued guidance on how to secure protected health information appropriately.[32] Both HHS and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) were required under the HITECH Act to issue regulations associated with the new breach notification requirements. The HHS rule was published in the Federal Register on August 24, 2009,[33] and the FTC rule was published on August 25, 2009.[34]

The final significant change made in Subtitle D of the HITECH Act, implements new rules for the accounting of disclosures of a patient's health information. It extends the current accounting for disclosure requirements to information that is used to carry out treatment, payment and health care operations when an organization is using an electronic health record (EHR). This new requirement also limits the timeframe for the accounting to three years instead of six as it currently stands. These changes won't take effect until January 1, 2011, for organizations implementing EHRs between January 1, 2009 and January 1, 2011, and January 1, 2013, for organizations who had implemented an EHR prior to January 1, 2009.

Effects on research and clinical care

The enactment of the Privacy and Security Rules has caused major changes in the way physicians and medical centers operate. The complex legalities and potentially stiff penalties associated with HIPAA, as well as the increase in paperwork and the cost of its implementation, were causes for concern among physicians and medical centers. An August 2006 article in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine detailed some such concerns over the implementation and effects of HIPAA.[35]

Effects on research

HIPAA restrictions on researchers have affected their ability to perform retrospective, chart-based research as well as their ability to prospectively evaluate patients by contacting them for follow-up. A study from the University of Michigan demonstrated that implementation of the HIPAA Privacy rule resulted in a drop from 96% to 34% in the proportion of follow-up surveys completed by study patients being followed after a heart attack.[36] Another study, detailing the effects of HIPAA on recruitment for a study on cancer prevention, demonstrated that HIPAA-mandated changes led to a 73% decrease in patient accrual, a tripling of time spent recruiting patients, and a tripling of mean recruitment costs.[37]

In addition, informed consent forms for research studies now are required to include extensive detail on how the participant's protected health information will be kept private. While such information is important, the addition of a lengthy, legalistic section on privacy may make these already complex documents even less user-friendly for patients who are asked to read and sign them.

These data suggest that the HIPAA privacy rule, as currently implemented, may be having negative impacts on the cost and quality of medical research. Dr. Kim Eagle, professor of internal medicine at the University of Michigan, was quoted in the Annals article as saying, "Privacy is important, but research is also important for improving care. We hope that we will figure this out and do it right."[35]

Effects on clinical care

The complexity of HIPAA, combined with potentially stiff penalties for violators, can lead physicians and medical centers to withhold information from those who may have a right to it. A review of the implementation of the HIPAA Privacy Rule by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that health care providers were "uncertain about their legal privacy responsibilities and often responded with an overly guarded approach to disclosing information...than necessary to ensure compliance with the Privacy rule".[35] Reports of this uncertainty continue.[38]

Costs of implementation

In the period immediately prior to the enactment of the HIPAA Privacy and Security Acts, medical centers and medical practices were charged with getting "into compliance". With an early emphasis on the potentially severe penalties associated with violation, many practices and centers turned to private, for-profit "HIPAA consultants" who were intimately familiar with the details of the legislation and offered their services to ensure that physicians and medical centers were fully "in compliance". In addition to the costs of developing and revamping systems and practices, the increase in paperwork and staff time necessary to meet the legal requirements of HIPAA may impact the finances of medical centers and practices at a time when insurance companies and Medicare reimbursement is also declining.

HIPAA and drug and alcohol rehabilitation organizations

Special considerations for confidentiality are needed for health care organizations that offer federally-funded drug or alcohol rehabilitation services.

Predating HIPAA by over a quarter century are the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970[39] and language amended by the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972.[35][40]

Legislative information

References

  1. ^ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
  2. ^ 29 U.S.C. § 1181(a)(2)
  3. ^ 29 U.S.C. § 1181(a)(3)
  4. ^ 29 U.S.C. § 1181(c)(1)
  5. ^ 29 U.S.C. § 1181(c)(2)(A)
  6. ^ 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7c
  7. ^ 42 U.S.C. § 1395ddd
  8. ^ 42 U.S.C. § 1395b-5
  9. ^ 45 C.F.R. 160.103
  10. ^ Definitions of a Covered Entity
  11. ^ Terry, Ken "Patient Privacy - The New Threats" Physicians Practice journal, volume 19, number 3, year 2009, access date July 2, 2009
  12. ^ See 45 CFR Sections 160.102 and 160.103.
  13. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.501
  14. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.524(b)
  15. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.512
  16. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.524(a)(1)(ii)
  17. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.502(a)(1)(iv)
  18. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.502(b)
  19. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.526
  20. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.522(b)
  21. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.528
  22. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.530(a)
  23. ^ 45 C.F.R. 164.530(b)
  24. ^ "How to File A Health Information Privacy Complaint with the Office for Civil Rights"
  25. ^ 45 C.F.R. 160.306
  26. ^ "Spread of records stirs fears of privacy erosion", December 23, 2006, by Theo Francis, The Wall Street Journal
  27. ^ http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/news-analysis/top-5-hospital-news-stories-of-the-week.html
  28. ^ CMS Transactions and Code Sets Regulations
  29. ^ Tim Wafa (J.D.). How the Lack of Prescriptive Technical Granularity in HIPAA Has Compromised Patient Privacy. Northern Illinois University Law Review, Volume 30, Number 3, Summer 2010. SSRN 1547425. 
  30. ^ Medical Privacy Law Nets No Fines. Rob Stein: The Washington Post.
  31. ^ HHS Strengthens HIPAA Enforcement
  32. ^ Guidance for Securing Protected Health Information
  33. ^ Health and Human Services Breach Notification Rule
  34. ^ Federal Trade Commission Breach Notification Rule
  35. ^ a b c d Wilson J (2006). "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy rule causes ongoing concerns among clinicians and researchers". Ann Intern Med 145 (4): 313–6. PMID 16908928. 
  36. ^ Armstrong D, Kline-Rogers E, Jani S, Goldman E, Fang J, Mukherjee D, Nallamothu B, Eagle K (2005). "Potential impact of the HIPAA privacy rule on data collection in a registry of patients with acute coronary syndrome". Arch Intern Med 165 (10): 1125–9. doi:10.1001/archinte.165.10.1125. PMID 15911725. 
  37. ^ Wolf M, Bennett C (2006). "Local perspective of the impact of the HIPAA privacy rule on research". Cancer 106 (2): 474–9. doi:10.1002/cncr.21599. PMID 16342254. 
  38. ^ "Keeping Patients’ Details Private, Even From Kin," New York Times, July 3, 2007.
  39. ^ Pub.L. 91-161; 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-3 (1976); omitted and moved to 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 (2006 through Pub.L. 102-321)
  40. ^ Pub.L. 92-255, 42 U.S.C. § 290ee-3 (1976); omitted and moved to 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 (2006 through Pub.L. 102-321)

External links