HIPAA Compliant video conferencing.

[thecomputerguy]

With all the corona stuff going on and everyone moving to remote I got a referral to 70 year old client who needs to do therapy via video conferencing. Skype is out because it's not HIPAA compliant as far as I know, I looked into a couple options .. Zoom looks like it offers a HIPAA solution for $200 per month.

The key here is ease of use, it has to be easy to use, the guy is operating on a 10 year old Mac. I honestly have no idea as to what the status of the Mac is or if new software will even be compatible.

Key here again is ease of use, this guy is 70 and mostly computer illiterate. I honestly don't even want the job because I am so slammed with work right now, but he was a referral so I'm willing to put a little bit of time into it, if it becomes too difficult then I'll just drop him.

 

[Tech Savvy]

I literally was just about to make a post about this!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[britechguy]

How does this become "our problem"? And by "our" I mean those of us serving home users.

Telepractice and the video conferencing for same is the responsibility of the practitioner providing the service, and the consumer uses whichever compliant service that particular practitioner specifies. Most of it is occurring via web-based portal apps.

I do not interpret this referral as being the service provider, but the patient. If I'm wrong then just ignore this entire message.

 

[SAFCasper]

Skype for Business is HIPAA compliant. So is Microsoft Teams.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

They on O365...if so, yeah...Teams!

 

[thecomputerguy]

It's literally one guy who can probably barely use email, and more than likely has an AOL email account. So going big with Office 365 with teams is probably not the way to go.

The feeling I get from this guy is even if I provide him with a super simple option... as in ... open program, send email invitation, click connect and your in it's probably going to blow way past him, and possibly past whoever he is providing services to.

I need ULTRA simple or I'm just going to opt out of it. I'd rather force him into a $200 p/m option if it's simpler than struggle to teach him how to use Teams.

 

[Sky-Knight]

There is nothing out there that's simpler than Teams... if you think training on its use as a struggle then... well I'm not sure what you expect.

You can do a Teams only trial for 6 months for free too.

 

[britechguy]

Also, I'm sorry to say, but it seems abundantly clear that he could not provide telehealth services. There is a basic threshold of ability to use the tools of the trade that he simply does not have and will not be able to acquire in a timely manner.

I would stay away from this job just for ethical reasons. One is not supposed to attempt to provide treatment one is not competent to provide. There are skills needed to provide telehealth treatment that don't just "appear out of thin air" even for the tech savvy.

 

[SAFCasper]

It's literally one guy who can probably barely use email, and more than likely has an AOL email account. So going big with Office 365 with teams is probably not the way to go.

The feeling I get from this guy is even if I provide him with a super simple option... as in ... open program, send email invitation, click connect and your in it's probably going to blow way past him, and possibly past whoever he is providing services to.

I need ULTRA simple or I'm just going to opt out of it. I'd rather force him into a $200 p/m option if it's simpler than struggle to teach him how to use Teams.

Is this not a bit contradictory?
Office 365 at $5/month would be "going big" - meanwhile a $200/month Zoom subscription is ok?

 

[fencepost]

One thing I saw suggested somewhere was doxy.me, which has a free tier with lower-quality video but is specifically listed as a telemedicine package. The focus may be on mobile devices, which would also free up the computer for an EMR. Paid plans are from $35/month.

Edit: looks like browser-based on PC and Mac. Not sure how good the LD video is, but the $35 paid monthly is hopefully affordable.
Edit2: and the paid version allows receiving payments, though you'd probably need to look into the details for him.

 

[thecomputerguy]

Is this not a bit contradictory?
Office 365 at $5/month would be "going big" - meanwhile a $200/month Zoom subscription is ok?

I personally find teams confusing to use, I have it on my computer and to invite someone out of org into a simple video call .... dunno ... inside org ... no problem ... out of org ...?

I just setup a client today who needed basic chat with slack ... and my god that program is so easy to use.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Out of org consists of, click chat, type in their email address, and start chatting. From there, you simply push the button.

 

[thecomputerguy]

Out of org consists of, click chat, type in their email address, and start chatting. From there, you simply push the button.

Just tried with my wifes hotmail account, asks to search externally, which I allowed, and did not find or attempt to invite anyone.

I'm going to guess that this means that the recipient of the chat is required to have a teams account active and in MS's database which is absolutely not an option. Invitations need to be sent similar to gotomeeting type style.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Just tried with my wifes hotmail account, asks to search externally, which I allowed, and did not find or attempt to invite anyone.

I'm going to guess that this means that the recipient of the chat is required to have a teams account active and in MS's database which is absolutely not an option. Invitations need to be sent similar to gotomeeting type style.

That requires the audio conferencing subscription. Teams interoperates with all Skype now, including Skype personal. It doesn't just work with anything. So the email address in question needs to either be another Teams user, or another Skype user.

 

[Doc+Com]

Take a look at ClockTree (www.clocktree.com). It claims to be HIPAA compliant and seems very reasonably priced.

 

[Markverhyden]

I personally find teams confusing to use, I have it on my computer and to invite someone out of org into a simple video call .... dunno ... inside org ... no problem ... out of org ...?

I just setup a client today who needed basic chat with slack ... and my god that program is so easy to use.

Like any of these other things they have to be plugged into the OEM's system.

 

[SAFCasper]

Like any of these other things they have to be plugged into the OEM's system.

Usually yes, but with Teams that isn't true.

You can create a new meeting and invite an external user by adding their email address. They get sent a calendar invite with a link to join the meeting. Open that link in Chrome or Edge and they can jump straight into the meeting.
- No download required.
- No additional software required.
- No sign-in required.
It all runs in the browser.

You lose some functionality by no using the app but nothing essential. Things like blurring your background, sharing your desktop, virtual whiteboard etc. You need the app for those.

NOTE:
Firefox, IE, Safari etc work but they don't support video calling; only audio. So you need to download the Teams app to use video calling on a Mac. Still doesn't require a sign-in though so quite easy to do.