Assessment of US Hospital Compliance With Regulations for Patients’ Requests for Medical Records

Abstract

Importance Although federal law has long promoted patients’ access to their protected health information, this access remains limited. Previous studies have demonstrated some issues in requesting release of medical records, but, to date, there has been no comprehensive review of the challenges that exist in all aspects of the request process. Objective To evaluate the current state of medical records request processes of US hospitals in terms of compliance with federal and state regulations and ease of patient access. Design, Setting, and Participants A cross-sectional study of medical records request processes was conducted between August 1 and December 7, 2017, in 83 top-ranked US hospitals with independent medical records request processes and medical records departments reachable by telephone. Hospitals were ranked as the top 20 hospitals for each of the 16 adult specialties in the 2016-2017 US News & World Report Best Hospitals National Rankings. Exposures Scripted interview with medical records departments in a single-blind, simulated patient experience. Main Outcomes and Measures Requestable information (entire medical record, laboratory test results, medical history and results of physical examination, discharge summaries, consultation reports, physician orders, and other), formats of release (pick up in person, mail, fax, email, CD, and online patient portal), costs, and request processing times, identified on medical records release authorization forms and through telephone calls with medical records departments. Results Among the 83 top-ranked US hospitals representing 29 states, there was discordance between information provided on authorization forms and that obtained from the simulated patient telephone calls in terms of requestable information, formats of release, and costs. On the forms, as few as 9 hospitals (11%) provided the option of selecting 1 of the categories of information and only 44 hospitals (53%) provided patients the option to acquire the entire medical record. On telephone calls, all 83 hospitals stated that they were able to release entire medical records to patients. There were discrepancies in information given in telephone calls vs on the forms between the formats hospitals stated that they could use to release information (69 [83%] vs 40 [48%] for pick up in person, 20 [24%] vs 14 [17%] for fax, 39 [47%] vs 27 [33%] for email, 55 [66%] vs 35 [42%] for CD, and 21 [25%] vs 33 [40%] for online patient portals), additionally demonstrating noncompliance with federal regulations in refusing to provide records in the format requested by the patient. There were 48 hospitals that had costs of release (as much as $541.50 for a 200-page record) above the federal recommendation of $6.50 for electronically maintained records. At least 6 of the hospitals (7%) were noncompliant with state requirements for pr...

Sharing Ethics Consultation Notes With Patients Through Online Portals

“…However, few patients access information in the EHR because of practical challenges in requesting these records. 4,5 As the use of patient portals has become more prevalent, OpenNotes, an international movement committed to encouraging the use and studying the effects of patient portals, has developed. 8 The movement has grown quickly since its inception in 2010 following a landmark study involving roughly 25 000 patients.…”

“…In particular, we articulate 2 benefits of increased patient access. First, providing patients access to some of their ethics consultation notes through online portals would facilitate patients' exercise of an existing, but currently underutilized, 4,5 right to access their health records. Second, easily accessible and understandable ethics consultation notes might help patients appreciate the ethical concepts that are meant to guide clinical practice.…”

Six countries, six individuals: resourceful patients navigating medical records in Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, Sweden and the USA

“…But these requests take time and effort, and costs can be involved. 11 I once requested a copy of my record and finally got it on a DVD. Had I asked for a paper copy, I would have had to pay $725.40 out of my own pocket.…”

Open Humans: A platform for participant-centered research and personal data exploration

“…Beyond biomedical datasets, there are data from wearable devices, social media, and other data held by private companies, for whom data exports are often not available. In other cases data access might be legally mandated, but the practical outcomes are mixed or in progress [27,28], e.g., for clinical health data in the United States as mandated by the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and 2009 Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HIPAA and HITECH Act), and for personal data in the European Union as mandated by rights to data access and data portability in the 2016 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [29,30]. In addition, within the context of research involving human participants, data access may be recommended [31] but not legally required, and as a result is not typically provided [32].…”