DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Lahey Clinic Hospital settles OCR charges stemming from theft of laptop used with CT scanner

Posted on November 24, 2015 by Dissent

Hot off the presses: there’s been another settlement announced by OCR. This one involves Lahey Hospital and Medical Center (Lahey Clinic Hospital), who have agreed to pay $850,000 and to adopt a robust corrective action plan to correct deficiencies in its HIPAA compliance program.

Lahey is a nonprofit teaching hospital affiliated with Tufts Medical School, providing primary and specialty care in Burlington, Massachusetts. The incident involved the theft of a laptop with 599 patients’ protected health information.  Although there is no press release issued yet, according to the Resolution Agreement, Lahey notified HHS in October, 2011 that the unencrypted laptop was used in connection with a computerized tomography (“CT”) scanner. The laptop was reportedly stolen from an unlocked treatment room off of the inner corridor of Lahey’s Radiology Department.

In investigating the incident, OCR found that

  • Lahey failed to conduct an accurate and thorough analysis of the potential risks and vulnerabilities to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its ePHI as part of its security management process. See 45 C.F.R. §164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A).
  • Lahey failed to implement reasonable and appropriate physical safeguards for a workstation that accesses ePHI to restrict access to authorized users. See 45 C.F.R. § 164.310(c).
  • With respect to the workstation, Lahey failed to implement policies and procedures that govern the receipt and removal of hardware and electronic media that contain ePHI into and out of its facility, and the movement of these items within its facility. See 45 C.F.R. § 164.310(d)(1).
  • Lahey failed to assign a unique user name for identifying and tracking user identity with respect to the aforementioned workstation. See 45 C.F.R. § 164.312(a)(2)(i).
  • Lahey did not implement a mechanism to record and examine activity on the workstation at issue in this breach. See 45 C.F.R. § 164.312(b).
  • Lahey impermissibly disclosed the ePHI of 599 individuals for a purpose not permitted by the Privacy Rule. See 45 C.F.R. § 164.502(a).

In addition to the $850,000 fee, Lahey has agreed, without any admissions or concessions, to a multi-element corrective action program, detailed in the Resolution Agreement.


Related:

  • Protected health information of 462,000 members of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana involved in Conduent data breach
  • TX: Kaufman County Faces Cybersecurity Attack: Courthouse Computer Operations Disrupted
  • Bombay High Court Orders Department of Telecommunications to Block Medusa Accounts After Generali Insurance Data Breach
  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
  • JFL Lost Up to $800,000 Weekly After Cyberattack, CEO Says No Patient or Staff Data Was Compromised
  • John Bolton Indictment Provides Interesting Details About Hack of His AOL Account and Extortion Attempt
Category: Health DataOf NoteTheftU.S.

Post navigation

← Fifth arrest in TalkTalk breach as 18-year-old from Wales held on suspicion of blackmail
Anthem Fires Back at Data Breach Suit →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.