RE: ? NARCOLEPSY ?
When you go to a specialist, normally there is a form you film out the first visit in which you list your GP and your referring doctor, or there is a referral slip or letter you have handed them with the necessary information, and copies of the study are sent by matter of course to both for their files. You can get copies from any of the three sources. There is no legal reason for any physician or hospital to refuse to allow you access to your own records, although if you are talking about a lab, there may be a fee for the photocopy. Some doctor's offices also charge a fee, but here it is hidden in the general costs of contacting a physician, so I am not sure in the US how that would be fee structured. Don't let it wait too long if you want the data, once it is filed it will be more expensive to retrieve it. Anything left more than a year at a specialist's (unless you are a continuously active case) is moved to a morgue for the next seven years, and it costs more to retrieve that.
However, most of the raw data will be gobbledygook to you, only the report will hold anything of value for you to glean something from. And even though today we have computers to read a lot of eeg data and other data collected for a test like yours, computers that are good at pattern recognition, someone still has to go over the ton of readings by hand to check it, and even if they rely on a computer's reading of events (it will more or less underline areas of concern and the tech will still have to look a them) it still has to be analysed and a report made from that, and that is time consuming. Meanwhile they are working on the next ten cases and working on yours and five previous ones, so you can imagine they are very busy and it takes some time to get it all done. Furthermore, the data produced isn't a short strip, like an ekg, which can be read at a glance - it is very lengthy and takes some time to go through and understand, doing backwards comparisons throughout. And in your case, there are four sets of data to compare, and that takes time again.
I would not seek out the raw data unless you are qualified to read it, or you have someone who is, and are willing to pay the expense. The final report is all you need in most cases, and all you should ask for. Narcolepsy is not that hard to see in the data if you are trained to know what you are looking for, but it is hard if you don't. The report should contain all relevant information for you or any physician. And don't worry about the lab tech missing something in the data - as I said, they know what they are looking for and it would jump out at them when reading the raw data.
One more thing, I have access to my own data because it is my data, by law, not because I am a doctor. And just because I am a doctor, I cannot access another patient's data, even at the hospital where I teach, just on a whim. I would need to be a consultant on the case and need the permission of the patient or their physician to do so. And even though at our hospital everything is now kept on a computer, there are safeguards to prevent doctors from different departments to go "trawling" through files of people who aren't their patients. Confidentiality rules are very strong here, and I know that the same data protections are in place in the US. Your data is yours, by law. The only reason to refuse you the data is the cost or mischigas of retrieving it. They may query you as to why you want it, and certainly will make you jump through hoops to prove you are who you are, but that is all.