Author Topic: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74  (Read 1468875 times)

1 Member and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

greencat

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2744
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5835 on: May 28, 2014, 06:47:32 PM »
http://medicine.yale.edu/ymg/news/summer2012/epic_hipaa.aspx

Basically, a security feature that protects patient privacy by making people give a reason for accessing a record and sending an alert that someone has accessed the record.

Update on my PD candidates:
I haven't seen the janitorial staff member who entered an area he wasn't supposed to *and* may have been behaving inappropriately towards some female staff members since last week.  I think he's gone or has at least been reassigned elsewhere.

My boss is back, and she has a multi-page document detailing the various major errors my new coworker has made.  I gather from what she told me that the ball is rolling on his termination.

DoubleTrouble

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1357
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5836 on: May 28, 2014, 07:33:26 PM »
Years ago, a friend of mine who was a hospital janitor told me that one of her co-workers was fired when she was caught reading charts that were sitting on a desk in an office she was cleaning.  Now, it could be argued that the charts shouldn't have been left out on the desk, but the office was locked.  She also knew that being caught reading charts was a fireable offense when she was hired, as it was part of the briefing (according to my friend.)

This happened to someone I worked in a nursing school & it got ugly. We had a full-time faculty member in the hospital with an illness. A part-time faculty member supervising our students at the same hospital noticed the full-time faculty was in the hospital & opened full-time faculty member's chart to read it :o >:(  No, part-time faculty did not have any reason to read the chart as our students were not assigned to that floor & even if they were they would not have been assigned to full-time faculty.

Full-time faculty member finds out, raises a stink; our dean & faculty finds out & raises a stink; part-time faculty member is fired from our school & gets serious reprimands from hospital. The kicker was that part-time faculty member tried to deny the whole incident & appeal but Epic doesn't lie & is in place just for situations like this. Plus everything they said just didn't add up, even my non-nurse self could figure it out.

Is Epic the app with the "break the glass" feature?  We have it at work, but I don't know what it is that has that feature (where the app essentially tracks who opened a patient's medical record -- employees are even not allowed to open their own without going through the proper channels for access).  Your PT faculty member knew darned well what he/she was doing was wrong.
I use Epic at work--there's the "break the glass" feature (very annoying since most of the time the reason I'm doing it is so I can view whether we got a scan of the pt's insurance card to verify the info was correct (correct plan, electronic payor id, get the phone # to call the insurance, etc).  But there is also an audit history (or something like that) that details everywhere I (and everyone else who has been in the acct) has been.  When they brought this in, they *told* us all in training about the audit feature and advised us that unless we have a common last name, being in the acct of someone w/ same last name would flag for review (family members, but I don't think they use this for people who have last names that are in the top 10 most common in the county) as well as people who are neighbors.

I mean, it's one thing to know that a co-worker is a patient because the two people are friends/socialize outside of work, but satisfying curiosity is just right out.  Everyone who works in a hospital in any capacity should have learned that already.

I would guess because HR was able to pull the exact time she opened closed the record & it was open waaaaaay too long for her to dismiss it as an "oops, I didn't pay attention to the file I was opening." The full-time faculty member was very well-known in our area & had an unusual name.

MrTango

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2469
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5837 on: May 29, 2014, 04:36:56 PM »
New coworker is at it again.  Besides the fact that I've had to explain the same fairly simple problem to him three weeks in a row, he has now decided to describe, in writing in an internal system, a person who dropped off a form for someone else as "unknown hottie."  New coworker will hopefully be former coworker soon.

Please tell me his boss gets to see that entry.
CRUD MONKEYS! that made me laugh and I choked on my cranberry juice.  :P

Our boss is back tomorrow.  I fully intend to draw her attention to it.

Her attention?  I'm not saying that it would be any less bad if the boss was a guy, but that's a double fail right there.

greencat

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2744
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5838 on: May 29, 2014, 05:19:06 PM »
New coworker is at it again.  Besides the fact that I've had to explain the same fairly simple problem to him three weeks in a row, he has now decided to describe, in writing in an internal system, a person who dropped off a form for someone else as "unknown hottie."  New coworker will hopefully be former coworker soon.

Please tell me his boss gets to see that entry.
CRUD MONKEYS! that made me laugh and I choked on my cranberry juice.  :P

Our boss is back tomorrow.  I fully intend to draw her attention to it.

Her attention?  I'm not saying that it would be any less bad if the boss was a guy, but that's a double fail right there.

Fortunately, it turned out that someone who had not seen whoever dropped it off entered it after the fact as a joke, because the new guy had failed to make an entry in the field.  Given that the person that made the entry is not generally a horrible person, he got a slap on the wrist and a reminder that doing something like that is borderline sexual harassment.

New coworker has managed plenty of assorted PD in the two months he's been here - even without this incident.  He's just generally incompetent, and he's unpleasant to work with besides.

Sirius

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10015
  • Stars in my eyes!
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5839 on: May 29, 2014, 06:03:46 PM »
The situation with the janitor being fired for reading medical records was years before HIPAA.  Even so, the hospital computer system I used years ago allowed those of us who worked in the records section to look people up, and we were constantly being reminded that our access was because we worked with the medical records, and anyone caught looking people up for any other reason besides business would be in trouble. 

Here's one for you:  One of my military co-workers, who knew that Mr. Sirius was the one who did pregnancy tests in the lab, wanted me to ask him to move her pregnancy test to the front of the queue.  I refused, and reminded her that he could get into a lot of trouble for doing that.  He told me she should have known that without me having to remind her.

rose red

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 7927
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5840 on: May 29, 2014, 06:31:40 PM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

jaxsue

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10328
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5841 on: May 30, 2014, 11:50:50 AM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

Kind of related story: in my former city, several years ago, a woman who worked at a hospital took her teenage daughter to work with her. The DD looked up peoples' information and called them, telling them they'd tested positive for HIV! It was big news, of course. The mom lost her job because of it.

bloo

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1302
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5842 on: May 30, 2014, 12:16:07 PM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

Kind of related story: in my former city, several years ago, a woman who worked at a hospital took her teenage daughter to work with her. The DD looked up peoples' information and called them, telling them they'd tested positive for HIV! It was big news, of course. The mom lost her job because of it.

It wouldn't be this one, would it? http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Teenager-Arrested-in-AIDS-Phone-Hoax-She-told-3043736.php

Reading it makes me want to throw up. How heartless.

jaxsue

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10328
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5843 on: May 30, 2014, 12:26:25 PM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

Kind of related story: in my former city, several years ago, a woman who worked at a hospital took her teenage daughter to work with her. The DD looked up peoples' information and called them, telling them they'd tested positive for HIV! It was big news, of course. The mom lost her job because of it.

It wouldn't be this one, would it? http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Teenager-Arrested-in-AIDS-Phone-Hoax-She-told-3043736.php

Reading it makes me want to throw up. How heartless.

That's the one! I'd forgotten the year - it has been a long time!

gramma dishes

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8318
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5844 on: May 30, 2014, 12:41:05 PM »
Interestingly the article doesn't say the mother lost her job.  It says she "may be disciplined" and adds that it's a dismissible offense, but it doesn't indicate that that actually happened.  It should have!  >:(

mmswm

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2412
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5845 on: May 30, 2014, 12:42:53 PM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

I used to work in deposit operations at a major bank.  I had several high profile accounts cross my desk.  In all but one case, somebody else had to point out to me that I was dealing with a big name.  These things just don't bother me.  At some point, they all become just numbers on a screen.  My job is to figure out what went wrong and fix the problem, not to worry about where Big Name Celebrity spends his/her money.  I guess I get why some people might get star struck, but when you work with thousands of different accounts every week, they all just sort of run together.  At least for me. The fun was following the trail and figuring out the puzzle (since is was always a nice little logic puzzle to figure things out and fix the accounts.)  It's amazing just how many ways a checking account can get screwed up.
Some people lift weights.  I lift measures.  It's a far more esoteric workout. - (Quoted from a personal friend)

Jocelyn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3265
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5846 on: June 04, 2014, 12:53:29 AM »
Looking at records reminds me of when I worked at a bank. One day, an employee found out a major celebrity was a customer and looked up the file. The employee wasn't up to anything; just got blinded by celebrity. Of course we  all have to look up dozens, even hundreds, of customers a day, but some customers are flagged and you better have a real reason for accessing those account. I'm don't recall if they were fired or just got into major trouble.

Many years ago, I worked at a hospital in Kansas City. The Royals were in the World Series and their star player had an unfortunate attack of hemorrhoids, which necessitated his being admitted and treated surgically. (This was all publicly reported in the media at the time). The day of his surgery, scrub suits mysteriously vanished, to the point that people who had legitimate reasons for needing a surgical scrub suit were unable to find one. (Each area that used scrubs had their own color/style, so that someone in OB/GYN scrubs would immediately stand out in the General Surgery area, for example). The only logical explanation was that people had stolen them so they could sneak into the surgical area and peep into the OR.
Not all the suits were returned the day after the surgery, so scrub suits were short for a few weeks until replacements arrived.

iridaceae

  • Boring in real life as well
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3929
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5847 on: June 04, 2014, 04:09:56 AM »
At the hotel I work at I had to sign a confidentiailty agreement shortly after I started; it is not unknown for us to get celebrities here.

What does surprise people is that the front desk doesn't gossip much about the celebrity as if they are here they want quiet and privacy- we are a hotel where if you want privacy we respect that and are very lowkey all the way around- we tend to gossip about the jerk in 1234 or how adorable the bride and groom checking in were or if you've seen 2345's dog: it's ginormous!

ladyknight1

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8353
  • Operating the logic hammer since 1987.
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5848 on: June 04, 2014, 08:52:53 AM »
A newly hired staff member at the Florida Department of Children and Families has been arrested along with her husband for child neglect and drug possession with intent to distribute.

Link: http://www.wesh.com/news/dcf-investigator-husband-charged-with-child-neglect-possession-of-marijuana/26286162#!UpiZR

A brief synopsis: A search warrant was executed on the property to find the home was filthy, infested with insects and had no working toilet, so the house reeked of waste. They have six children. Her employment has been terminated. The deputies also found drug plants, drugs ready for distribution and a handgun.

Mediancat

  • Shibboleth of Shadowland
  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 634
Re: Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74
« Reply #5849 on: June 04, 2014, 10:20:43 AM »
At the hotel I work at I had to sign a confidentiailty agreement shortly after I started; it is not unknown for us to get celebrities here.

What does surprise people is that the front desk doesn't gossip much about the celebrity as if they are here they want quiet and privacy- we are a hotel where if you want privacy we respect that and are very lowkey all the way around- we tend to gossip about the jerk in 1234 or how adorable the bride and groom checking in were or if you've seen 2345's dog: it's ginormous!

I work for the FEP division of Carefirs of MD, which does government employee insurance, and we still have a dedicated employee, vetted by the government, who handles the People You May Have Heard Of. Once or twice a year we got people like that -- things do slip through -- and if we get them we're pretty much told to take them directly to our managers, who will then take them to the processor in question, and not to discuss it with anyone.

Fortunately, no one I know of's been dumb enough to say, "I got Congressman X! Did you know he has Creeping Crud syndrome?" Which would elicit the response of, in the words of Rupert Giles: "Allow me to answer that question with a firing."

Rob
"In all of mankind's history, there has never been more damage done than by someone who 'thought they were doing the right thing'." -- Lucy, Peanuts