You are on page 1of 2

Case 2.

4:

Included in attached PowerPoint presentation.

Case 2.5:

1. In this case the record should not be released to Mrs. John Smith. She is a non-custodial
parent and therefore does not have the right to receive access to any medical records
concerning her daughter. She can visit her daughter, but this is the limit of her rights in
this case.

2. For this situation the medical record should not be released to Mr. Fred Mitchell. By
giving his daughter up for adoption four years prior to this request his right to the
record became null and void. Amy is not his legal child because of the adoption, and
therefore he cannot receive her birth record.

3. In this situation the record should be released to Mrs. Lynn Olsen. She is the wife of Tim
which already gives her the right to receive her husband’s lab results. On top of this she
also has a note signed by her husband giving her permission to receive the results.
Getting explicit permission from the patient or her husband would allow her to receive
the record.

4. The record should be released to the audit team in this situation. When an investigator
is auditing the patient records of an organization it is mandatory by law to release the
requested records. This helps to maintain the integrity, and quality of the records, and
allows the investigator to find any missing records.

5. The record should not be released to Dr. Rex Harrison. The record should not be
released until Dr. Harrison has received written permission from Mrs. Flynn’s immediate
family members, or her son in this case. Without written permission there is not
guarantee that Dr. Harrison has permission from the patient’s son, and he could just as
easily be lying.
Case 2.8:

When a case of abuse comes up in the medical field, and the papers find information which should not
be normally accessible then an employee likely leaked the information. An audit trail is a great method
to find out both who accessed information concerning a case, and when they accessed the information.
In this case all that was included were user names, and the date which the user accessed the
information. To be a more effective audit trail the audit should include more elements. The following
are elements which would aid in the effectiveness of the audit trail. Other elements which should have
been included would be what operations were performed by everyone, and any unusual actions which
may have taken place. By seeing what operations were performed the organization can understand
what each person did, such as saving the file, or sending it to an external e-mail. By understanding what
unusual actions were performed the organization could understand if something out of place occurred.
This could have included excessive printing or saving of files. One last element which would have been
helpful is the exact file which was accessed during the time stamps. When the file is known the
organization can identify who accessed prevalent files to the case at hand, and they can identify who
was in the wrong more easily.

You might also like