The main attempt has been to adopt standards to help improve the effectiveness and the working of the nation health care systems in the use of electronic data (Beaver & Herold, 2003).
In simple terms the main aim of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 is to guide the development and maintenance of the patient information management. As mentioned earlier, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (2010) explains, that “Title II of HIPPA required the Department of Health and Human Services to establish national standards for electronic health transactions and national identifiers for providers, health plans and employers” (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 2010).
In an excellent article named, Integrating privacy and security: coordination benefits HIPAA compliance efforts, the author Alder explains, even after a number of years have passed for the deadline compliance with HIPPA, ‘By summer 2006, only 39 percent of respondents to an AHIMA survey reported that their facilities were in full compliance with the HIPAA privacy regulations’ (Adler, 2008). The author also highlights that, ‘There are a number of reasons why compliance has been difficult to achieve and maintain, but the most cited reason is a lack of resources’ (Adler, 2008).
The rules for the HIPPA have been very long and intricate and the writing and implementation of the rules has taken a very long time. The process of the development of the transactions and the code sets, rules and also the national employer identity, took the government a high amount of time to complete. The process has been very time consuming making the process look like it took several years to write and for the implementation of the riles because of the high level of scrutiny and intricacies that were involved. The HIPPA intended to include the healthcare environment and also with the high levels of technological developments the process was long drawn and took several