Hi Rowena,
In my view the name of the person who accessed the record is NOT personal data of the patient and therefore cannot be disclosed. It may be possible to include a job title instead, but that might also reveal a persons identity (say, if there's only one Practice Nurse for example).
My assumption is that the patient might have a potential complaint - has she heard "on the grapevine" that a staff member at the practice has been talking about her medical conditions for example. I would consider speaking to the patient to find out a bit of context as to why they are interested, particularly as if there is some unauthorised disclosure going on, the practice needs to take action.
From experience there are often people included in the audit logs of systems who would have no expectation of having their names disclosed, nor would it be particularly relevant. For example, in a previous role, in a Local Authority, I was required to produce a full social care record print out for a coroner. This included the full audit log of the record, and the list of people on this audit included myself as the person downloading the record, and other colleagues in my team who had been responsible for providing support on use of the system, and providing system admin tasks. So it wasn't limited solely to those people with a direct role in the case. These people would have even less of an expectation to have their names redacted. (In our case we redacted all names other than those known to be involved in the direct care of the individual in question, although also provided an unredacted copy to the coroner which was not disclosed further, but provided context for them to be able to see our reasoning for the redactions).
Best wishes,
Michelle
Michelle Peel
Information Manager
Transport for Greater Manchester
2 Piccadilly Place, Manchester M1 3BG
Direct line 0161 244 1123, Extension 701123
www.tfgm.com
Please don't print this email unless you really need to.
NOTE: This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by replying to this email, and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----Original Message-----
From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rowenna Fielding
Sent: 17 September 2015 11:53
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [data-protection] Audit log entries - personal data?
Hi. I'm pondering a question in relation to an individual's subject access request to a medical practice which specifically includes a request for the audit logs showing who has accessed their records. The question is; to what extent are those audit log entries likely to be within the scope of the SAR and will exemptions apply?
As I see it, any audit logs which show the username of the system user accessing the data will be the personal data of the system user, at least while in the hands of the Data Controller. Will whether this is personal data when passed on depend on how "identifiable" the username is (eg, 1stname.lastname of an unusual name is more likely to be PID than "js12345" for example)?
Although the audit log entries are linked to the individual's records (which contain personal data), if the logs themselves do not contribute any identifying or descriptive information, are they to be considered "personal data" on their own? What about if the logs show a pattern of access from which the patient's appointment history can be determined? And if the pattern of access by certain specialists indicates certain health issues, are the logs then *sensitive* personal data? If the patient is the Data Controller (albeit exempted from all obligations for domestic purposes) then will the audit trails therefore be their personal data only in their hands and the hands of the Data Controller whose system generated the logs?
I know that NHS and ICO guidance both support making access history available to patients but I think that is 'good practice' guidance erring on the side of a wide interpretation of DPA. However, I am not sure how this can be reconciled with the exemption for 3rd party data from subject access rights - although the patient will know who the medical staff looking after their care are; they may not know which of them have accessed their records and when - would that access history be the personal data of the medical staff also?!
I'm just confusing myself now.....any advice welcome!
Rowenna
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask] All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|