But if the records are not maintained electronically, then there is no requirement to provide them electronically. The paragraph before the one you quoted, ends with:
if not, in a readable hard copy form or such other form and format as agreed to by the covered entity and the individual.
If the records are only hard copy, then there is no requirement to convert them into an electronic format just to provide them to an individual. I know this is the case with my primary care physician and I think it may be the case with other smaller practices. Many of these may be small practices run by older doctors, so they may simply retire. If you've been practicing since say 1970 or so and haven't converted everything to electronic format by now, why bother?
Comments
But if the records are not maintained electronically, then there is no requirement to provide them electronically. The paragraph before the one you quoted, ends with:
If the records are only hard copy, then there is no requirement to convert them into an electronic format just to provide them to an individual. I know this is the case with my primary care physician and I think it may be the case with other smaller practices. Many of these may be small practices run by older doctors, so they may simply retire. If you've been practicing since say 1970 or so and haven't converted everything to electronic format by now, why bother?
Correct. Yet over 50% of providers have an EHR. And that number is growing every month.
Because Meaningful Use incentivizes you to do so. The government gives you money.