NEW YORK – Pending legislation in New York is raising concerns among hospital organizations, some of which fear the laws may increase hospitals’ liability for the expenses of duplicating medical records.
The organizations say three bills before both the state’s assembly and senate are based on misconceptions that hospital documentation is primarily electronic and that it’s relatively easy and inexpensive to duplicate records. The rules seek to limit the fees that healthcare organizations can charge for records.
The Association of Health Information Outsourcing Services, or AHIOS, also charges that the proposed laws will curtail the ability of healthcare providers and those they hire to provide duplicate health records to “produce records in a confidential, secure and economically sustainable manner.”
So far, Illinois and Ohio are the only other states that have enacted legislation setting reimbursement for duplication of electronic medical records. However, the organization believes other states are considering legislation similar to New York’s, and its members are concerned that reimbursement and confidentiality issues will be compromised elsewhere if other states pass laws that fail to recognize the complexities of the process.
Compiling patient records for litigation already is almost entirely outsourced and a costly proposition. The demand for records is likely to grow, particularly as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services expands its Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program into more states.
Current legislation suggests a base payment of $5 per record for healthcare organizations that provide patients’ health records. That’s not enough to cover expenses, said Joe Fournier, vice president of legal affairs for ChartOne Inc. and co-legislative chairman for AHIOS.
“They seem to be under the impression that it’s easier and cheaper to produce copies electronically or on a CD,” he said.
Safeguards are needed to ensure that patient confidentiality is protected, Fournier said, and that doesn’t change even if the patient’s record is in an electronic format.
“The majority of requests we receive are for purposes of personal injury litigation, so this legislation would essentially subsidize personal injury litigation at the potential expense of patient privacy,” he said.
States are laboring under the same misconception and are looking at ways to limit what providers charge for copies of records, said Jan McDavid, general counsel with Healthport Technologies and legislative chairman with AHIOS.
“When someone says, ‘Just produce (a record) electronically,’ it’s not that easy,” McDavid said. “It’s a labor-intensive process even if the record is automated.”