Any Update or B Hill or is it "wait and see" until next week

DP5555 said:
Technically speaking, sharing the patient's current condition and game plan as he did is considered a HIPAA violation if he found this information out because of the position that he is in (working as a physician of physical therapist for the University). I realize what he said is pretty obvious regarding Hill's injury, but he was more specific about the plan of action (waiting for the swelling to go down before having an MRI). That information in combination with his screen name could certainly lead you to believe it's a HIPAA issue.

I work with someone who is crazy about HIPAA rules... Honestly it feels like almost anything can be considered a HIPAA violation in one way or another. I realize hawk doctor isn't really telling us anything we dont already know so it doesn't bother me one bit. However, if he is getting his information regarding Barkley's injury from his place of work then he shouldn't be posting it on here. You just have to be really careful because you never know when the wrong person is paying attention and will decide to get you fired for it. Most healthcare organizations have zero tolerance for it. It isn't worth it.
Click to expand...

If he were "in the know", he wouldn't be posting here. Just sayin
 
hawkeyebob62 said:
If he were "in the know", he wouldn't be posting here. Just sayin
Click to expand...

How do you know? He could be a med student who was outside of the room during Hill's appt. He could be a resident who was inside the room. You have no idea. People all over a hospital find out information they shouldn't. That's going to happen. It's telling other people that information that is wrong.

Relax people... I didn't say what he did was a HIPAA violation. Read closely. I said "If he found this information out from his place of work" then it is a HIPAA violation to share that with other people. Regardless of the knowledge the public had previous to that. If he just simply came to his own conclusion and shared that with us then it's fine. However, if he's a University employee who supported Hill in his healthcare then it is very wrong to share that with anyone else.

It's very likely that he just shared his experience in dealing with these types of injuries. I was simply being the devil's advocate here. There's a fine line that needs to be walked when you work in the medical profession. Especially when it comes to a high profile football player.
 
I'm involved in the medical world and fully understand HIPAA and medical practice implications. I also am not throwing the "HIPAA poster" under the bus, but I still have this question: Who would potentially be hurt by hawkdoc's comments if indeed he did have inside information (which I'm sure he does not)?

Therein lies the problem with HIPAA. A good idea with too much collateral damage, like so many other regulations.

Now that I've fully hijacked this thread and tippy toed the gray political line on this board, I'll stop. :)
 
PTHawk said:
I'm involved in the medical world and fully understand HIPAA and medical practice implications. I also am not throwing the "HIPAA poster" under the bus, but I still have this question: Who would potentially be hurt by hawkdoc's comments if indeed he did have inside information (which I'm sure he does not)?

Therein lies the problem with HIPAA. A good idea with too much collateral damage, like so many other regulations.

Now that I've fully hijacked this thread and tippy toed the gray political line on this board, I'll stop. :)
Click to expand...

Good post, PTHawk...........typically, Government regulation, like HIPAA, do MUCH, MUCH more harm than good. Any Moron knows that :D
 
By the way, I fully agree with hawkdoctor's comments. Sometimes the initial swelling post-injury makes the Lachman test a bit difficult to read. Despite its cost, an MRI is still pretty standard item on the diagnostic protocol at this point, especially for a D1 athlete I'd presume.
 
PTHawk said:
By the way, I fully agree with hawkdoctor's comments. Sometimes the initial swelling post-injury makes the Lachman test a bit difficult to read. Despite its cost, an MRI is still pretty standard item on the diagnostic protocol at this point, especially for a D1 athlete I'd presume.
Click to expand...

i'd have to guess you are right here PT. i'm sure they did all the physical structural tests once back in the locker room, and those finding would be confirmed by an MRI, probably today (i have no insider information as to the team's use/access of/to an MRI on a weekend). if surgery is needed, have to wait for swelling to go down for that as well.

as far as hipaa - what the dr said was a general statement that could be applicable to anyone who suffered a knee injury like the one in context.
 
dchawk75 said:
Every fact he mentioned was from public information. As a physician, he would be allowed to apply his background, training and experience to the information available and to reach an intelligent conclusion, which is what he appears to have done. No different than telling a lawyer the underlying facts from a newspaper article or police report and asking him to opine on what might happen to the person arrested. We are also so intimidated by these overreaching laws like HIPAA that all common sense is lost in the analysis of their scope.
Click to expand...

public knowledge? the posts above were saying sprain and 3-4 weeks. he spoke as if he knew more information and alluded to an acl tear. I wasn't meaning to start anything, just alerting him that it may have come off wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top