nerdexam
(ISC)2

HCISPP · Question #249

You work in the billing department of your agency and while processing claims, you notice the name of someone you know. Since you are curious, you decide to investigate and you pull their medical…

The correct answer is B. No. Accessing a patient's medical record out of personal curiosity violates HIPAA's minimum necessary standard and constitutes unauthorized access to PHI.

Privacy and Security in Healthcare

Question

You work in the billing department of your agency and while processing claims, you notice the name of someone you know. Since you are curious, you decide to investigate and you pull their medical record and read it. Is this appropriate?

Options

  • AYes
  • BNo

How the community answered

(59 responses)
  • A
    7% (4)
  • B
    93% (55)

Why each option

Accessing a patient's medical record out of personal curiosity violates HIPAA's minimum necessary standard and constitutes unauthorized access to PHI.

AYes

Yes is incorrect because employment at the organization does not grant blanket access to all records; access must be tied to a specific, work-related need for each record accessed.

BNoCorrect

No. HIPAA's minimum necessary standard requires that access to PHI be strictly limited to what is needed to perform a specific, authorized job function. A billing employee has no legitimate treatment or billing purpose for reading the full medical record of someone they personally know, and accessing it out of curiosity is an unauthorized use of PHI that violates both HIPAA regulations and organizational policy.

Concept tested: HIPAA minimum necessary standard and unauthorized PHI access

Source: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/minimum-necessary-requirement/index.html

Topics

#Unauthorized access#Privacy violation#Minimum necessary#PHI access

Community Discussion

No community discussion yet for this question.

Full HCISPP Practice