Data breaches lead to tougher notification requirement
HIPAA Weekly Advisor, September 20, 2010
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to HIPAA Weekly Advisor!
The Connecticut Insurance Department issued a bulletin last month that calls for state insurers to notify affected individuals and the state’s insurance commissioner of a breach of patient information no later than five calendar days after its discovery.
This requirement is even stricter than the one instituted in California—its five “business days” requirement is considered one of the toughest in the country.
Connecticut’s insurance officials made the move “in order to assure that Connecticut consumers are fully protected and informed in the event of any information security incident … that could pose a potential risk to the privacy of an individual’s personal health and/or financial information,” according to the bulletin.
Dawn McDaniel, a spokesperson for the Connecticut Insurance Department, told HIPAA Update in an e-mail that the bulletin is in response to “some recent data breaches, which were not reported in what we believe to be a timely manner.”
Though McDaniel did not cite the incident specifically, Connecticut’s state attorney general office announced July 6 it had reached a settlement with Health Net and its affiliates over the failure last year to secure the private medical records of 1.5 million policyholders and for the insurers’ delay in reporting the breach.
The settlement imposed a $250,000 fine on the company for HIPAA and HITECH violations, and requires the insurers to adopt rigorous security and notification measures.
Read the full story on HIPAA Update.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to HIPAA Weekly Advisor!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Searched