While covering another treatment room, you notice a coworker open the chart of a patient outside her assignment, saying she recognized the vehicle parked out front and wanted to know the diagnosis. She closes the record and laughs it off, and nothing leaves the department. Which response best applies the ARRT Standards of Ethics to this chart access?

The correct response addresses the incident at once: the chart should be closed, the coworker should be told that recognizing a vehicle does not authorize access, and the access should be reported to a supervisor. A patient record may be accessed only for a legitimate work-related purpose; curiosity is not one. The fact that the coworker closed the chart, laughed it off, or disclosed nothing does not make the access permissible or remove the need to report it. Recording the event in a privacy log is a sensible documentation step, but relying on routine review without notifying a supervisor omits timely escalation. Reporting and documenting the access while saying nothing to the coworker omits direct correction of the conduct; a clear reminder helps establish that the access was inappropriate and may prevent recurrence. Asking the coworker to file the report herself likewise shifts responsibility for raising the concern and does not ensure that a supervisor is informed. Exam caveat: follow the facility’s designated privacy-reporting process, since the required reporting channel may vary; use it promptly rather than treating a log entry or informal discussion as a substitute. Practical check: preserve only the minimum necessary facts—such as the patient, time, and observed access—and share them only with authorized personnel.