Also records retrieval, medical records retrieval service
Search for “medical record retrieval” and the results are companies that serve law firms and insurers. That is not a mistake on Google’s part; it is what the phrase has come to mean. Those companies obtain records under a patient’s signed authorization, by request to each custodian, at scale, for litigation, underwriting and claims. The product is a complete, certified copy, and the timescale is weeks.
A home health agency, a PACE organization or a practice preparing for a visit needs the same documents for a different reason and is entitled to a different route. As a treating provider it may receive another provider’s records for treatment without the patient’s authorization, under 45 CFR 164.506, and on the exchange networks it may ask for them by network query, identified by its NPI, and have them in minutes. No release form, no fee per custodian, no clerk at the other end. The timescale is the time it takes to organize what came back.
The two routes are not interchangeable, and the difference is the legal basis rather than the technology:
| Release of information | Treatment exchange | |
|---|---|---|
| Who asks | Anyone with an authorization | A treating provider, or its business associate |
| Legal basis | 45 CFR 164.508 or 164.524 | 45 CFR 164.506(c)(2) |
| Mechanism | Written request to each custodian | Query across the networks |
| Typical time | Days to weeks per source | Minutes |
| Typical user | Attorneys, insurers, disability examiners | Agencies, practices, PACE organizations |
Vivlio is on the right side of that table and nowhere on the left. It retrieves for treatment and the operations that support it, and its agreements say so. An agency that has been using an ROI process for its own admissions has been using the slow route for a disclosure that never required it.
