The paragraphs you link concern photographs that identify patients.
" Images that identify me
will be released and/or used outside the institution only upon written authorization from me or my legal representative."
It does not say anything there about what is going to be done with images that do not identify you. If the doctor wants to take a picture of your enormous kidney stone for his new research paper, well...guess what, he isn't going to ask you.
A lot of stink has been raised because doctors, particularly plastic surgeons and dentists, were using before and after photos of patients (without consent) in their advertising. You can imagine that it would be embarressing to see your face-lift photos on the back of a bus, especially if you hadnt told anyone you had one. That's why employers are so twitchy.
I agree the HC worker in the OP may very well be violating her workplace rules, but HIPPA applies to "identifying patient information"... so it would depend on what the photo was to determine that. Should she be more careful? Yes. Did she violate HIPPA...possibly not. Could she get fired? Maybe. Her bosses may decide to act on a mis-understanding of the law, as in this casehttp://www.realtime-itcompliance.com/privacy_and_compliance/2009/08/fired_because_photo_of_surgery.htm
From my readings of it, and my training- if it was a picture of say, like I said, a spleen, or a tumor- and the HC worker works in a large facility...then no, it probably was not a privacy breach. Photos of faces, x-rays, scars, body photos...those are breaches.
Not every photo in a text book needs to have a "model release"... the paragraph above that is quoted again applies to ones that contain PHI, not those that don't.
I think the HC worker is being careless posting this to FB, and it may very well cost her a job- but I wouldn't say she is being immoral. Just gross.