Thank you for providing a thoughtful analysis of the three scenarios. Please share some key aspects that you believe are best to guide ethical behaviors in regard to health information, technology, and social media.
Scenario 1: amusing media posting
Every time a accommodating visits any medical facility, they consistently apprehend affection affliction and confidentiality. With added and avant-garde technology, abounding bodies are able of accessing patient’s information, authoritative it difficult for healthcare workers to absolutely defended patients’ confidentiality. in the aboriginal place, healthcare cadre is declared to ensure that the advice that they allotment on their amusing media platforms no acute advice is aggregate through these platforms because they are not secure. The advice provided should not attempt the aegis and aloofness of the patients. a assistant charge aboriginal accede whether the advice provided can advance to the patient's character actuality appear and what the after-effects are.
This assistant has gone adjoin the HIPAA rule. According to HIPAA, the patient’s demographic such as their past, present, or future, and bloom affliction they accept received, should be adequate (Cannon, & Caldwell, 2016). In this case, the assistant has appear the accommodating abstracts such as their weight and diagnosis, which can advance to the identification of the patient. Today, It is easier to admission patient’s advice due to the aerial abstruse advancement. Therefore, the healthcare providers are declared to be actual accurate with the affectionate of advice aggregate on the online platforms because already it is shared, they may accept little or no ascendancy of who will admission the advice provided. this artisan does not appearance any professionalism that is appropriate by a bloom worker. Spreading the patient's advice on online platforms is illegal, and it is a abuse of patient’s rights. Every time a accommodating visits any medical facility, they consistently apprehend affection affliction and confidentiality
Scenario 2: presentation poster
Privacy is the patient’s appropriate to claimed advice protection. Acquaintance is actual analytical in ensuring that the third affair does not admission the patient’s information. All healthcare professionals are apprenticed by these rules that prohibit them from discussing a patient's medical advice with anybody abroad after consent. The patient's advice should additionally be stored in a way that guarantees the patient's privacy. In this case, the assistant should use the pictures but de-identify all the abstracts that can advance to the accommodating actuality articular by the third party.
De-identification is removing identifiers from the bloom advice that can advice analyze the patient, appropriately mitigating risks. De-identification additionally helps the healthcare workers to use the accommodating to abutment analysis after activity adjoin the set rules and regulations (Sokol, 2017). The HIPAA rules are analytical in that it provides admonition apropos re-identifying the PHI application a different code. This cipher is actual important and appropriately is not to be disclosed. In this case, the accommodating can use the client’s bane for apprenticeship purposes but ensure that there is no abstracts that can advance to the identification of the accommodating by the third party. HIPAA accoutrement acquiesce application advice that does not analyze the patient
Scenario 3: continued appellation care
There are assorted aloofness and aegis issues that are accompanying to a accommodating administration their advice with a abiding affliction facility. One of the above issues is the accommodating authoritative the advice that they accommodate to the healthcare workers. Therefore, there is a abundant affair apropos who should be authoritative the admission and the administration of advice in the abiding affliction facility. The accommodating advice is critical, and the ascendancy affair should be accepted with the owner's approval. The patients are accordingly declared to ascendancy the advice that they provide. In this case, Marcus is not abiding who he should accommodate his advice with. The accommodating may accordingly adumbrate some of the advice because he is not abiding who he should be accouterment the advice with and the aegis of the provided information.
There is additionally the alternative affair of assurance amid the accommodating and the healthcare provider. In adjustment to accept a acknowledged healthcare system, assurance amid the accommodating and the healthcare providers is paramount. The absence of assurance may accomplish the accommodating abort to acknowledge the all-important advice appropriate to advice bigger the patient's outcome. Failure to acknowledge some advice may advance to adverse effects.
There is additionally the likelihood of gaps in the aldermanic aspects of the aloofness and security-related institutions that advice aegis the patient's information. These gaps appear because of a abridgement of able behavior and abridgement of knowledge. This may advance to crooked bodies accessing the patients' information.
Cannon, A. A., & Caldwell, H. (2016). HIPAA violations amid nursing students: able moment or terminal mistake—a case study. J Nurs Educ Pract, 6(12), 41-48. Retrieved from; https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hollie_Caldwell/publication/305479324_HIPAA_violations_among_nursing_students_Teachable_moment_or_terminal_mistake-A_case_study/links/579787a108aec89db7b9a86b.pdf (Links to an alien site.)
Sokol, A. J. (2017). Clinical Analysis and Data: HIPAA, the Common Rule, the General Abstracts Aegis Regulation, and Abstracts Repositories. Merrill Series on The Analysis Mission of Public Universities, 47-62. Retrieved from: https://journals.ku.edu/merrill/article/view/7750/7359 (Links to an alien site.)
Order a unique copy of this paper