This proposed rule is no longer the most current information.
It will continue to be available for reference, but the
final rule has been published. View
the final rule.
|
Proposed Standards for Privacy and Individually Identifiable Health
Information
D. Uses and disclosures with individual authorization. (§
164.508)
This section addresses the requirements that we are proposing when
protected health information is disclosed pursuant to the individual's
explicit authorization. The regulation would require that covered
entities have authorization from individuals before using or disclosing
their protected health information for any purpose not otherwise
recognized by this regulation. Circumstances where an individuals
protected health information may be used or disclosed without authorization
are discussed in connection with proposed §§164.510 and
164.522 below.
This section proposes different conditions governing such authorizations
in two situations in which individuals commonly authorize covered
entities to disclose information:
- where the individual initiates the authorization because he
or she wants a covered entity to disclose his or her record, and
- where a covered entity asks an individual to authorize it to
disclose or use information for purposes other than treatment,
payment or health care operations.
In addition, this section proposes conditions where a covered entity
or the individual initiates an authorization for use or disclosure
of psychotherapy notes or research information unrelated to treatment.
See discussion above in section II.C.1.c.
Individually identifiable health information is used for a vast
array of purposes not directly related to providing or paying for
an individuals health care. Examples of such uses include
targeted marketing of new products and assessing the eligibility
of an individual for certain public benefits or for commercial products
based on their health status. Under these rules, these types of
uses and disclosures could only be made by a covered entity with
the specific authorization of the subject of the information. The
requirements proposed in this section are not intended to interfere
with normal uses and disclosures of information in the health care
delivery or payment process, but only to permit control of uses
extraneous to health care. The restrictions on disclosure that the
regulation would apply to covered entities may mean that some existing
uses and disclosures of information could take place only if the
individual explicitly authorized them under this section.
Authorization would be required for these uses and disclosures
because individuals probably do not envision that the information
they provide when getting health care would be disclosed for such
unrelated purposes. Further, once a patients protected health
information is disclosed outside of the treatment and payment arena,
it could be very difficult for the individual to determine what
additional entities have seen, used and further disclosed the information.
Requiring an authorization from the patient for such uses and disclosures
would enhance individuals control over their protected health
information.
We considered requiring a uniform set of requirements for all authorizations,
but concluded that it would be appropriate to treat authorizations
initiated by the individual differently from authorizations sought
by covered entities. There are fundamental differences in the uses
of information and in the relationships and understandings among
the parties in these two situations. When individuals initiate authorizations,
they are more likely to understand the purpose of the release and
to benefit themselves from the use or disclosure. When a covered
entity asks the individual to authorize disclosure, we believe the
entity should make clear what the information will be used for,
what the individual's rights are, and how the covered entity would
benefit from the requested disclosure.
Individuals seek disclosure of their health information to others
in many circumstances, such as when applying for life or disability
insurance, when government agencies conduct suitability investigations,
and in seeking certain job assignments where health is relevant.
Another common instance is tort litigation, where an individual's
attorney needs individually identifiable health information to evaluate
an injury claim and asks the individual to authorize disclosure
of records relating to the injury to the attorney.
There could also be circumstances where the covered entity asks
an individual to authorize use or disclosure of information, for
example to disclose it to a subsidiary to market life insurance
to the individual. Similarly, the covered entity might ask that
the individual authorize it to send information to a person outside
that covered entity possibly another covered entity or class
of covered entity for purposes outside of treatment, payment,
or health care operations. See proposed § 164.508(a)(2)(ii).
1. Requirements when the individual has initiated the authorization.
We are proposing several requirements that would have to be met
in the authorization process when the individual has initiated the
authorization.
The authorization would have to include a description of the information
to be used or disclosed with sufficient specificity to allow the
covered entity to know to which information the authorization references.
For example, the authorization could include a description of laboratory
results from July 1998 or all laboratory results
or results of MRI performed in July 1998. The covered
entity would then use or disclose that information and only that
information. If the covered entity does not understand what information
is covered by the authorization, the use or disclosure would not
be permitted unless the covered entity were able to clarify the
request.
We are proposing no limitations on the information to be disclosed.
If an individual wishes to authorize a covered entity to disclose
his or her entire medical record, the authorization could so specify.
But in order for the covered entity to disclose the entire medical
record, the authorization would have be specific enough to ensure
that individuals have a clear understanding of what information
is to be disclosed under the circumstances. For example, if the
Social Security Administration seeks authorization for release of
all health information to facilitate the processing of benefit applications,
then the description would need to specify all health information.
We would note that our proposal does not require a covered entity
to disclose information pursuant to an individual's authorization.
Therefore individuals may face reluctance on the part of covered
entities that receive authorizations requiring them to classify
and selectively disclose information when they do not benefit from
the activity. Individuals would need to consider this when specifying
the information in the authorization. Covered entities may respond
to requests to analyze and separate information for selective disclosure
by providing the entire record to the individual, who may then redact
and release the information to others.
We do not propose to require an authorization initiated by an individual
to state a purpose. When the individual has initiated the authorization,
the entity would not need to know why he or she wants the information
disclosed. Ideally, anyone asking an individual to authorize release
of individually identifiable health information would indicate the
purpose and the intended uses. We are unable to impose requirements
on the many entities that make such requests, and it would not be
feasible to ask covered entities to make judgments about intended
uses of records that are disclosed. In the absence of legal controls
in this situation, the prudent individual would obtain a clear understanding
of why the requester needs the information and how it would be used.
We are proposing that the authorization would be required to identify
sufficiently the covered entity or covered entities that would be
authorized to use or disclose the protected health information by
the authorization. Additionally, the authorization would be required
to identify the person or persons that would be authorized to use
or receive the protected health information with sufficient specificity
to reasonably permit a covered entity responding to the authorization
to identify the authorized user or recipient. When an authorization
permits a class of covered entities to disclose information to an
authorized person, each covered entity would need to know with reasonable
certainty that the individual intended for it to release protected
health information under the authorization.
Often, individuals provide authorizations to third parties, who
present them to one or more covered entities. For example, an authorization
could be completed by an individual and provided to a government
agency, authorizing the agency to receive medical information from
any health care provider that has treated the individual within
a defined period. Such an authorization would be permissible (subject
to the other requirements of this part) if it sufficiently identifies
the government entity as the recipient of the disclosures and it
sufficiently identifies the health care providers who would be authorized
to release the individuals protected health information under
the authorization.
We are proposing that the authorization must state a specific expiration
date. We considered providing an alternative way of describing the
termination of the authorization, such as the conclusion of
the clinical trial, or upon acceptance or denial of
this application for life insurance (an event),
but we are concerned that covered entities could have difficulty
implementing such an approach. We also considered proposing that
if an expiration date were indicated on the authorization, it be
no more than two or three years after the date of the signature.
We are soliciting comment on whether an event can be a termination
specification, and whether this proposed rule should permit covered
entities to honor authorizations with unlimited or extremely
lengthy expiration dates or limit it to a set term of years, such
as two or three years.
We are proposing that the authorization include a signature or
other authentication (e.g., electronic signature) and the date of
the signature. If the authorization is signed by an individual other
than the subject of the information to be disclosed, that individual
would have to indicate his or her authority or relationship with
the subject.
The authorization would also be required to include a statement
that the individual understands that he or she may revoke an authorization
except to the extent that action has been taken in reliance on the
authorization.
When an individual authorizes disclosure of health information
to other than a covered entity, the information would no longer
be protected under this regulation once it leaves the covered entity.
Therefore, we propose that the authorization must clearly state
that the individual understands that when the information is disclosed
to anyone except a covered entity, it would no longer be protected
this regulation.
We understand that the requirements that we are imposing here would
make it quite unlikely that an individual could actually initiate
a completed authorization, because few individuals would know to
include all of these elements in a request for information. We understand
that in most instances, individuals accomplish authorizations for
release of health records by completing a form provided by another
party, either the ultimate recipient of the records (who may have
a form authorizing them to request the records from the record holders)
or a health care provider or health plan holding the records (who
may have a form that documents a request for the release of records
to a third party). For this reason, we do not believe that our proposal
would create substantial new burdens on individuals or covered entities
in cases when an individual is initiating an authorized release
of information. We invite comment on whether we are placing new
burdens on individuals or covered entities. We also invite comment
on whether the approach that we have proposed provides sufficient
protection to individuals who seek to have their protected health
information used or disclosed.
2. Requirements when the covered entity initiates the authorization.
We are proposing that when covered entities initiate the authorization
by asking individuals to authorize disclosure, the authorization
be required to include all of the items required above as well as
several additional items. We are proposing additional requirements
when covered entities initiate the request for authorization because
in many cases it could be the covered entity, and not the individual,
that achieves the primary benefit of the disclosure. We considered
permitting covered entities to request authorizations with only
the basic features proposed for authorizations initiated by the
individual, for the sake of simplicity and consistency. However,
we believe that additional protections would be merited when the
entity that provides or pays for health care requests an authorizations
to avert possible coercion.
When a covered entity asks an individual to sign an authorization,
we propose to require that it provide on the authorization a statement
that identifies the purposes for which the information is sought
as well as the proposed uses and disclosures of that information.
The required statements of purpose would provide individuals with
the facts they need to make an informed decision as to whether to
allow release of the information. Covered entities and their business
partners would be bound by the statements provided on the authorization,
and use or disclosure by the covered entity inconsistent with the
statement would constitute a violation of this regulation. We recognize
that the covered entities cannot know or control uses and disclosures
that will be made by persons who are not business partners to whom
the information is properly disclosed. As discussed above, authorizations
would need to notify individuals that when the information is disclosed
to anyone except a covered entity, it would no longer be protected
under this regulation.
We propose to require that authorizations requested by covered
entities be narrowly tailored to authorize use or disclosure of
only the protected health information necessary to accomplish the
purpose specified in the authorization. The request would be subject
to the minimum necessary requirement as discussed in section II.C.2.
We would prohibit the use of broad or blanket authorizations requesting
the use or disclosure of protected health information for a wide
range of purposes. Both the information that would be used or disclosed
and the specific purposes for such uses or disclosures would need
to be specified in the notice.
We are proposing that when covered entities ask individuals to
authorize use or disclosure for purposes other than for treatment,
payment, or health care operations, they be required to advise individuals
that they may inspect or copy the information to be used or disclosed
as provided in proposed § 164.514, that they may refuse to
sign the authorization, and that treatment and payment could not
be conditioned on the patients authorization. For example,
a request for authorization to use or disclose protected health
information for marketing purposes would need to clearly state that
the individuals decision would have no influence on his or
her health care treatment or payment. In addition, we are proposing
that when a covered entity requests an authorization, it must provide
the individual with a copy of the signed authorization form.
Finally, we are proposing that when the covered entity initiates
the authorization and the covered entity would be receiving financial
or in-kind compensation in exchange for using or disclosing the
health information, the authorization would include a statement
that the disclosure would result in commercial gain to the covered
entity. For example, a health plan may wish to sell or rent its
enrollee mailing list. A pharmaceutical company may offer a provider
a discount on its products if the provider can obtain authorization
to disclose the demographic information of patients with certain
diagnoses so that the company can market new drugs to them directly.
A pharmaceutical company could pay a pharmacy to send marketing
information to individuals on its behalf. Each such case would require
a statement that the requesting entity will gain financially from
the disclosure.
We considered requiring a contract between the provider and the
pharmaceutical company in this type of arrangement, because such
a contract could enhance protections and enforcement options against
entities who violate these rules. A contract also would provide
covered entities a basis to enforce any limits on further use or
disclosures by authorized recipients. Although we are not proposing
this approach now, we are soliciting comment on how best to protect
the interests of the patient when the authorization for use or disclosure
would result in commercial gain to the covered entity.
3. Model forms.
Covered entities and third parties that wish to have information
disclosed to them would need to prepare forms for individuals to
use to authorize use or disclosure. A model authorization form is
displayed in Appendix to this proposed rule. We considered presenting
separate model forms for the two different types of authorizations
(initiated by the individual and not initiated by the individual).
However, this approach could be subject to misuse and be confusing
to covered entities and individuals, who may be unclear as to which
form is appropriate in specific situations. The model in the appendix
accordingly is a unitary model, which includes all of the requirements
for both types of authorization.
4. Plain language requirement.
We are proposing that all authorizations must be written in plain
language. If individuals cannot understand the authorization they
may not understand the results of signing the authorization or their
right to refuse to sign. See section II.F.1 for more discussion
of the plain language requirement.
5. Prohibition on conditioning treatment or payment.
We propose that covered entities be prohibited, except in the case
of clinical trial as described below, from conditioning treatment
or payment for health care on obtaining an authorization for purposes
other than treatment, payment or health care operations. This is
intended to prevent covered plans and providers from coercing individuals
into signing an authorization for a disclosure that is not necessary
for treatment, payment or health care operations. For example, a
provider could not refuse to treat an individual because the individual
refused to authorize a disclosure to a pharmaceutical manufacturer
for the purpose of marketing a new product.
We propose one exception to this provision: health care providers
would be permitted to condition treatment provided as part of a
clinical trial on obtaining an authorization from the individual
that his or her protected health information could be used or disclosed
for research associated with such clinical trial. Permitting use
of protected health information is part of the decision to receive
care through a clinical trial, and health care providers conducting
such trials should be able to condition participation in the trial
on the individuals willingness to authorize that his or her
protected health information be used or disclosed for research associated
with the trial. We note that the uses and disclosures would be subject
to the requirements of § 164.510(j) below.
Under the proposal, a covered entity would not be permitted to
obtain an authorization for use or disclosure of information for
treatment, payment or health care operations unless required by
applicable law. Where such an authorization is required by law,
however, it could not be combined in the same document with an individual
authorization to use or disclosure of protected health information
for any purpose other than treatment, payment or health care operations
(e.g., research). We would require that a separate document
be used to obtain any other individual authorizations to make it
clear to the individual that providing an authorization for such
other purpose is not a condition of receiving treatment or payment.
6. Inclusion in the accounting disclosures.
As discussed in section II.H.6, we propose that covered entities
be required to keep a record of all disclosures for purposes other
than treatment, payment or health care operations, including those
made pursuant to authorization. In addition, we propose that when
an individual requests such an accounting or requests a copy of
a signed authorization form, the covered entity must give a copy
to the individual. See proposed § 164.515.
7. Revocation of an authorization by the individual.
We are proposing that an individual be permitted to revoke an authorization
at any time except to the extent that action has been taken in reliance
on the authorization. See proposed § 164.508(e). That is, an
individual could change her or his mind about an authorization and
cancel it, except that she or he could not thereby prevent the use
or disclosure of information if the recipient has already acted
in reliance on the authorization. For example, an individual might
cancel her or his authorization to receive future advertisements,
but the entity may be unable to prevent mailing of the advertisements
that the covered entity or third party has already prepared but
not yet mailed.
An individual would revoke the old authorization and sign a new
authorization when she or he wishes to change any of the information
in the original authorization. Upon receipt of the revocation, the
covered entity would need to stop processing the information for
use or disclosure to the greatest extent practicable.
8. Expired, deficient, or false authorization.
The model authorization form or a document that includes the elements
set out at proposed § 164.508 would meet the requirements of
this proposed rule and would have to be accepted by the covered
entity. Under § 164.508(b), there would be no authorization
within the meaning of the rules proposed below if the submitted
document has any of the following defects:
- the date has expired;
- on its face it substantially fails to conform to any of the
requirements set out in proposed § 164.508, because it lacks
an element;
- it has not been filled out completely. Covered entities may
not rely on a blank or incomplete authorization;
- the authorization is known to have been revoked; or
- the information on the form is known by the person holding
the records to be materially false.
We understand that it would be difficult for a covered entity to
confirm the identity of the person who signed the authorization.
We invite comment on reasonable steps that a covered entity could
take to be assured that the individual who requests the disclosure
is whom she or he purports to be.
|