This proposed rule would provide an individual with the right to request a covered plan or provider to amend or correct protected health information relating to the individual. A covered plan or provider would be required to accommodate requests with respect to any information that the covered plan or provider determines to be erroneous or incomplete, that was created by the plan or provider, and that would be available for inspection and copying under proposed § 164.514.
We are concerned about the burden that requests for amendment or correction could place on covered plans and providers and have tried to limit the process to those situations where amendment or correction would appear to be most important. We invite comment on whether our approach reasonably balances burden with adequately protecting individual interests.
We propose to require a covered plan or provider to accommodate a request for amendment or correction if the plan or provider created the information in dispute. We considered requiring covered plans and providers to amend or correct any erroneous or incomplete information it maintains, regardless of whether it created the information. Under this approach, if the plan or provider did not create the information, then it would have been required to trace the information back to the original source to determine accuracy and completeness. We rejected this option because we concluded that it would not be appropriate to require the plan or provider that receives a request to be responsible for verifying the accuracy or completeness of information that it did not create. We also were concerned about the burden that would be imposed on covered plans and providers if they were required to trace the source of any erroneous or incomplete information transmitted to them.
We would rely on a combination of three other requirements to ensure that protected health information remains as accurate as possible as it travels through the health care system. First, we are proposing that a covered plan or provider that makes an amendment or correction be required to notify any relevant persons, organizations, or other entities of the change or addition. Second, we are proposing that other covered plans or providers that receive such a notification be required to incorporate the necessary amendment or correction. Finally, we are proposing that covered plans or providers require their business partners who receive such notifications to incorporate any necessary amendments or corrections. See the discussion in section II.F.4. We are soliciting comments whether this approach would effectively ensure that amendments and corrections are communicated appropriately.
We are proposing that covered plans and providers be required to accommodate requests for amendment or correction for as long as the entity maintains the protected health information. We considered requiring covered plans and providers to accommodate requests for a specific period or defining a specific retention period. We rejected that approach because many laws and professional standards already designate specific retention periods and we did not want to create confusion. In addition, we concluded that individuals should be permitted to request amendments or corrections for as long as the information is maintained by the covered plan or provider. We are soliciting comments on whether we should include a specific duration requirement in this proposed rule.
In § 164.516, we are proposing that covered plans and providers be required to have procedures that enable individuals to exercise their rights to request amendment or correction, including a means by which individuals could request amendment or correction of protected health information about them. We considered whether this proposed rule should include detailed procedures governing an individual’s request. But as with the procedures for requesting inspection and copying, we are only providing a general requirement and permitting each plan or provider to develop procedures in accordance with its needs. Once the procedures are developed, the plan or provider would document them in accordance with section § 164.520 and include a brief explanation in the notice that is provided to individuals pursuant to section § 164.512.
We are proposing that the covered plan or provider would take action on a request for amendment or correction as quickly as the circumstances require, but not later than 60 days following the request. The justification for establishing a time limitation for amendment and correction is virtually identical to that provided for the time limitation for inspection and copying. We concluded that the entity should be provided with some additional flexibility in this context. Depending on the nature of the request, an amendment or correction could require significantly more time than a request for inspection and copying. If a covered plan or provider needed more than 30 days to make a decision, we would encourage, but not require, it to send an acknowledgment of receipt to the individual including an explanation of the reasons for the delay and a date when the individual couldexpect a final decision.
In § 164.516(c)(3), we are proposing that, upon accepting an amendment or correction, the covered plan or provider would be required to make reasonable efforts to notify relevant persons, organizations, or other entities of the change or addition. An entity would be required to notify such persons that the individual identifies, or that the covered plan or provider identifies as 1) a recipient of the erroneous or incomplete information, and 2) a person who:
- has relied upon that information to the detriment of the individual; or
- is a person who could foreseeably rely on such erroneous or incomplete information to the detriment of the individual.
We are concerned about the potential burden that this notification requirement would impose on covered plans and providers. We do not, however, anticipate that a significant number of requests would be submitted to any entity and therefore the need for such notifications would be rare. In addition, we determined that because health information can travel so quickly and efficiently in the modern health care system, the need for notification outweighed the potential burden. It is important to note that a reasonableness standard should be applied to the notification process -- if the recipient has not relied upon the erroneous or incomplete information to the detriment of the individual or if it is not foreseeable that the recipient would do so, then it would not be reasonable for the covered plan or provider to incur the time and expense of notification. If, however, if the incorrect information is reasonably likely to be used to the detriment of the individual, the entity should make every effort to notify the recipients of the information of the changes as quickly as possible.
We discussed a number of options regarding the notification of other entities. We considered only requiring that the entity provide the individual with a listing of who else could have received the information. This would place the burden of notification in the hands of the individual rather than the entity. Because individuals would not have the same contacts and relationship with other entities as the original covered entity, we decided that placing the burden on individuals would be more cumbersome for both individuals and the secondary entities receiving the requests. We also considered not including a notification requirement. However, this would mean that individuals would need to both figure out where the information had gone to and make separate requests for amendment or correction to every entity. This also appeared to be overly difficult. We believe that the option we are proposing is fair to both individuals and covered entities.
In proposed § 164.516(c)(4), we would require a covered plan or provider to provide the individual with a written statement in plain language of the reason for the denial and permit the individual to file a written statement of disagreement with the decision to deny the request.
If the individual chooses to file a statement of disagreement, then the covered plan or provider must retain a copy of the statement with the protected health information in dispute. The covered plan or provider could require that the statement be a reasonable length, provided that the individual has reasonable opportunity to state the nature of the disagreement and offer his or her version of accurate and complete information. In all subsequent disclosures of the information requested to be amended or corrected, the covered plan or provider would be required to include a copy of its statement of the basis for denial and, if provided by the individual, a copy of his or her statement of disagreement. If the statement submitted by the individual is unreasonably long, the covered plan or provider could include a summary in subsequent disclosures which reasonably explains the basis of the individual’s position. The covered plan or provider would also be permitted to provide a rebuttal to the individual’s statement of disagreement and include the rebuttal statement in any subsequent disclosures.
We considered requiring the covered plan or provider to provide a mechanism for appealing denials of amendment or correction but concluded that it would be too burdensome. We are soliciting comment on whether the approach we have adopted reasonably balances the burdens on covered plans or providers with the rights of individuals.
If a covered plan or provider receives a notification of erroneous or incomplete protected health information as provided in proposed § 164.516(d), we are proposing that the covered plan or provider or be required to make the necessary amendment or correction to protected health information in its custody that would be available for inspection and copying. This affirmative duty to incorporate amendments and corrections would be necessary to ensure that individuals’ protected health information is as accurate and complete as possible as it travels through the health care system.