States Expand Medicaid Reimbursement of School-Based Telehealth Services Center for Connected Health Policy June 2021 49 states currently have policies allowing Medicaid reimbursement of telehealth in schools – 24 had existing policies, 31 recently expanded policies during the pandemic, and at least four states have indicated they may make the changes permanent. The National Academy for State Health Policy released a report last month on how states are increasing Medicaid coverage of school-based telehealth during COVID-19, as well as assessing which services can be effectively delivered via telehealth and how to best support equitable access to services via telehealth for students. The authors found that 49 states currently have policies allowing Medicaid reimbursement of telehealth in schools – 24 had existing policies, 31 recently expanded policies during the pandemic, and at least four states have indicated they may make the changes permanent. As far as services, the brief showed that most states cover audiology and speech-language therapy via telehealth, although behavioral health services had the greatest expansion and providing telemental health they found to be a recognized best practice. Half of all states cover individualized education program (IEP) plan services or Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (EPSDT) services as well. The report also suggests that moving forward states should explore federal funding opportunities to expand technology and broadband access for students facing disparities in access to care. < Previous News Next News >

How Telemedicine Requirements and Policies Will Change Post-Pandemic Jordan Scott, HealthTech July 2021 The public health emergency led to a loosening of telemedicine requirements and an uptick in virtual care use, but are these changes here to stay? Telehealth was instrumental in providing care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic as people avoided in-person interactions. While many people are now comfortable returning to in-person appointments, Americans are more open to using telehealth services than they were prior to the pandemic, and telehealth use is expected to remain above pre-pandemic levels. Some telehealth restrictions were lifted at the beginning of the pandemic out of necessity, a major factor in the rapid expansion of virtual care services. However, many providers are wondering if those changes are here to stay or if a tightening of telemedicine requirements will lead to a “telehealth cliff.” The CARES Act: How the Pandemic Changed Telehealth Policy Former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar declared a public health emergency on Jan. 31, 2020, in response to growing concerns over the spread of COVID-19. And on March 13, 2020, by Proclamation 9994, President Donald Trump declared a national emergency. As a result of authority granted under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) provided flexibility for Medicare telehealth services. It did this by broadening the waiver authority under section 1135 of the Social Security Act. Before the declarations, providers were subject to CMS’ geographic and originating site requirements for telehealth reimbursement under Medicare. According to the requirements, the originating site is the patient’s location at the time telehealth services are received. Under Section 1834(m) of the Social Security Act, the originating site must be a physician’s office, skilled nursing facility or hospital. The patient must also be located within a Health Professional Shortage Area or in a county outside of any Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. “That meant an extremely small proportion of Medicare reimbursement was going toward telehealth, well under 1 percent,” says Kyle Zebley, vice president of public policy for the American Telemedicine Association (ATA). Dr. Ezequiel Silva III, a radiologist with the South Texas Radiology Imaging Centers and a member of the American Medical Association’s Digital Medicine Payment Advisory Group, explains that the waivers also impacted licensure. Physicians enrolled in the Medicare program licensed in any state can provide telehealth services to people anywhere in the U.S. if the state allows it. Each state has its own telehealth policies. The waivers also allowed physicians to practice from home since many offices were closed at the beginning of the pandemic, says Silva. He adds that CMS’ Interim Final Rule expanded coverage of audio-only health services, which helped those without access to two-way audiovisual technology and those who weren’t comfortable using video telehealth. Telehealth policies were put into place in 1997. While there’s been incremental expansion, the regulations haven’t kept up with changes in technology and what’s now possible in virtual care, says Zebley, who adds that if the pandemic hadn’t happened, the pace of telehealth adoption would have remained slow. However, he explains that the Medicare waivers had an extraordinary impact and led to an uptick in telehealth utilization. “During the first quarter of 2020, the number of telehealth visits increased by 50 percent, compared with the same period in 2019, with a 154 percent increase in visits noted in surveillance week 13 in 2020, compared with the same period in 2019,” reads a CDC report released in October 2020. “Laws hadn’t kept up with the way providers wanted to deliver care, so it was a game-changing moment,” says Zebley. “Ninety percent of Medicare beneficiaries are satisfied with their care, and two-thirds are very satisfied.” HIPAA-Compliant Telehealth Requirements Likely to Return The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforces HIPAA requirements. It announced on March 17, 2020, that “OCR will exercise its enforcement discretion and will not impose penalties for noncompliance with the regulatory requirements under the HIPAA Rules against covered health care providers in connection with the good faith provision of telehealth during the COVID-19 nationwide public health emergency.” Telehealth creates a unique challenge for HIPAA because a physician is no longer interfacing with a patient behind a closed clinic door, says Silva. Instead, information is transferred digitally, which requires different security precautions. Silva explains that while security requirements were reduced, OCR loosely defined which communication technologies could be used for telehealth. It also encouraged healthcare organizations to notify patients of privacy risks. AMA found this guidance to be appropriate, says Silva. However, it’s likely that HIPAA requirements will be reinstated once the public health emergency ends. “The reinstatement of HIPAA requirements is inevitable, and healthcare organizations need to prepare accordingly. They need to have their regulatory and legal offices getting ready to follow the spirit and letter of the law,” says Zebley. “It’s very clear what HIPAA requires. If an organization is operating a telehealth platform or technology that’s not HIPAA compliant, I expect that it would need to be compliant perhaps in a few months’ time.” The ATA supports the reinstatement of HIPAA requirements because it’s important to protect patient data, explains Zebley. Will Telehealth Restrictions Return Post-Pandemic? The public health emergency and telehealth waivers are still in place, but if the declaration ends before Congress or CMS acts, healthcare providers could hit a “telehealth cliff.” “If that happens it’s going to be regressive,” says Zebley. “However, I’m extremely optimistic that Congress will act before the emergency ends.” The public health emergency has been renewed approximately every 90 days since it was first declared, with the most recent renewal on July 20, 2021, by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra. Silva says there’s been speculation that the public health emergency will last through the end of the calendar year. If it doesn’t, the previous Medicare telehealth requirements could go back into effect until CMS rule-making addresses the issue. CMS released its 2022 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule on July 19, 2021, which would extend the waivers on some telehealth services, especially those that address mental health, through the end of 2023. Comments are due on Sept. 17, 2021 “As CMS continues to evaluate the temporary expansion of telehealth services that were added to the telehealth list during the COVID-19 PHE, CMS is proposing to allow certain services added to the Medicare telehealth list to remain on the list to the end of Dec. 31, 2023, so that there is a glide path to evaluate whether the services should be permanently added to the telehealth list following the COVID-19 PHE,” reads the CMS fact sheet. The CONNECT for Health Act of 2021, introduced in the U.S. Senate on April 29, 2021, aims to expand the use of telehealth by removing geographic requirements for telehealth services and expanding originating sites permanently. It’s one of several bills that could address the long-term expansion of telemedicine. Organizations such as the ATA and AMA have been advocating for a permanent expansion of telehealth services on federal and state levels. AMA published a telehealth implementation playbook for those looking to implement telehealth. Silva says the healthcare industry needs to look at the data around patient experience and the value of telehealth to determine how to proceed with virtual care policy going forward. Zebley encourages those who are concerned about the possible loss of telehealth flexibility to reach out to their elected officials. Source: https://healthtechmagazine.net/article/2021/07/how-telemedicine-requirements-and-policies-will-change-post-pandemic-perfcon < Previous News Next News >

Telehealth's ‘great opportunity’ at community health centers Emily Olsen June 14, 2022 ​ Ray Lowe, senior vice president and CIO at AltaMed Health Services, discusses his organization's move to virtual care at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and how such care can evolve. See original video: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/video/telehealths-great-opportunity-community-health-centers < Previous News Next News >

Endocrine Society Provides Guidance for Appropriate Use of Telehealth Mark Melchionna October 07, 2022 The Endocrine Society published a policy perspective covering various factors, such as clinical and patient factors, which could help determine subjective care needs and whether telehealth use is appropriate. October 07, 2022 - Aiming to enhance personalized care, the Endocrine Society created a policy perspective containing five aspects of care that can help clinicians decide when using telehealth is appropriate. With 18,000 members spread across 122 countries, the Endocrine Society is focused on promoting efforts to treat all hormone-related conditions, including diabetes, obesity, and hormone-related cancers. Amid the rapid growth of telehealth that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare stakeholders anticipate that telehealth will continue to pave its way into various aspects of clinical care. Published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, the Endocrine Society policy perspective describes five aspects of care that can assist the process of determining when telehealth is appropriate. “Clinicians will need to draw upon their own knowledge of each patient and their clinical goals to decide when to incorporate telehealth into their care,” said the policy perspective's first author Varsha G. Vimalananda, MD, a physician-scientist at the VA Bedford Healthcare System and an associate professor of medicine at Boston University School of Medicine, in a press release. “Telehealth visits can be considered as an option each time we schedule an appointment. Patient preference should be elicited, and decisions guided by weighing the factors we describe in the perspective piece.” The five aspects of care to be considered when deciding whether telehealth is appropriate for a patient are clinical factors including whether an in-person exam is necessary, patient factors such as access to transportation and comfort level with technology, the patient-clinician relationship, the physical surroundings of the clinician, and the availability of infrastructure needed for telehealth visits. Telehealth is playing an increasingly valuable role in a personalized healthcare, but physicians and patients need to discuss how it fits into the care plan they are deciding on, according to the policy perspective. "Moving forward, endocrine care is likely to involve a hybrid of in-person and telehealth visits, and thus the decision to use telehealth for any given patient will not be made at a single time point but rather considered in a longitudinal context," the perspective states. Previous studies have indicated that various benefits that arose from telehealth expansion. For example, a study published in September found that increased telehealth use during the pandemic led to a drop in opioid overdose risk. Researchers studied data from before and during the pandemic, which indicated that the likelihood of receiving opioid use disorder services and medications was higher in the mid-pandemic patient group that had increased access to telehealth. Further, telehealth continues to be used widely across the country. Recent data from FAIR Health shows that telehealth use rose 1.9 percent nationally from June to July and that it increased in three of the four US census regions: the Midwest, the South, and the West. See original article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/endocrine-society-provides-guidance-for-appropriate-use-of-telehealth < Previous News Next News >

New FAIR Health White Papers Shows Large Telehealth Utilization Increases Before COVID-19 Center for Connected Health Policy April 2021 Results showed that telehealth utilization increased by 73% from 2018 to 2019 with telehealth claims comprising over one-third of all health care claims in 2019. In its fourth edition of the Healthcare Indicators and Medical Price Index White Paper, FAIR Health found that the fastest area of healthcare utilization growth from 2018 to 2019 occurred for telehealth services. FAIR Health conducted the annual analysis using its data repository of 32 billion claims for patients in commercial insurance plans. Results showed that telehealth utilization increased by 73% from 2018 to 2019 with telehealth claims comprising over one-third of all health care claims in 2019. FAIR Health also noted that the most common claim type for telehealth was for mental health services, bolstering other recent evidence that telehealth utilization continues to grow for behavioral and mental health services. The findings are an important contribution to ongoing policy discussions about where telehealth is going after the pandemic. While most telehealth experts have been paying close attention to telehealth utilization during the pandemic, these findings suggest that the story of telehealth’s rapid growth likely begins in 2019, one year prior to the public health emergency. FAIR Health is a national nonprofit organization that maintains a large database of privately insured healthcare claims data. The organization performs healthcare utilization and cost analyses on market trends for use by researchers, consumers, and industry stakeholders. For more information about FAIR Health's data, view their website. FAIR Health Consumer: https://www.fairhealthconsumer.org/#about FH Healthcare Indicators and FH Medical Price Index 2021: https://s3.amazonaws.com/media2.fairhealth.org/whitepaper/asset/FH%20Healthcare%20Indicators%20and%20FH%20Medical%20Price%20Index%202021--A%20FAIR%20Health%20White%20Paper--FINAL.pdf < Previous News Next News >

Senate panel seeks to expand telehealth for Medicare mental health services Jeff Lagasse, Editor May 27, 2022 The draft suggests removing Medicare's in-person visit requirement, protecting audio-only telehealth and supporting provider use. Senate panel seeks to expand telehealth for Medicare mental health servicesThe draft suggests removing Medicare's in-person visit requirement, protecting audio-only telehealth and supporting provider use. Jeff Lagasse, Editor Photo: Kilito Chan/Getty Images The Senate Finance Committee, led by Chair Ron Wyden (D.Ore.), is seeking to make permanent some of the telehealth flexibilities enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic that pertain to mental health services. In what the committee calls a mental health "bill of rights," Wyden and ranking committee member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), along with Senator John Thune (R-S.D.) and Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.), released a discussion draft for telehealth policies that suggests, among other things, removing Medicare's in-person visit requirement and codifying audio-only mental health coverage. Wyden said via statement that the policies outlined in the draft "will help strengthen access, awareness and support for telehealth." Aside from nixing Medicare's in-person visit requirement, the committee's proposed policies include establishing benefit transparency for mental health services delivered via telehealth, to inform Americans with Medicare how and when they can access such services. The committee also recommended directing Medicare and Medicaid to promote and support provider use of telehealth; and incentivizing states to use their CHIP programs to establish local solutions to serve behavioral health needs in schools, including through telehealth. The telehealth discussion draft is the first legislative draft released by the committee since it began its larger mental healthcare initiative. Other discussion drafts may be released prior to a committee markup. The committee said it's committed to fully paying for any mental health package with bipartisan, consensus-driven offsets. Earlier this year, the committee announced five areas of focus for addressing shortfalls in mental healthcare: workforce, care integration, mental health parity, telehealth and youth. WHAT'S THE IMPACT? When the pandemic first began, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services waived barriers to telehealth reimbursement, but those flexibilities only last for 151 days after the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency. The current PHE expires in mid-July. If again extended as expected and for another 90 days, the PHE would end in mid-October, just prior to the midterm elections. Most experts have said they expect the PHE to be extended through the end of the year. To make telehealth flexibilities permanent, CMS needs authority from Congress. Wyden says that the committee's goal is ultimately to craft a behavioral telehealth bill by this summer. Other proposed policies in the draft include requiring fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage plans to publicly post information on Medicare beneficiaries' rights to receive telehealth services for mental healthcare, plus information on approximate cost-sharing obligations for virtual mental health services. The committee also recommended: mandating that the federal government collect information on trends and care quality and give regular reports to lawmakers. requiring that Medicare give providers guidance on improving access to virtual mental healthcare for those with language barriers and hearing or vision impairments. "Telehealth, particularly for behavioral health services, has become an essential component of care, and I am pleased that we have this opportunity to improve access to telemental health care, particularly for underserved communities," said Cardin. THE LARGER TREND The draft comes at a time when mental health concerns are rising for many Americans. Earlier this month a CVS Health/Morning Consult poll showed Americans of all backgrounds, but especially those who are Black, young adults, older than 65 or who identify as LGBTQIA+, are increasingly concerned about mental health and how to access care. Results show that a majority of respondents, 59%, have experienced concerns about either their own mental health or that of family and friends. That's a 9% increase since April 2020. Another majority, 53%, agree that hearing about other people's challenges makes them more comfortable seeking out resources and care for themselves. A 2021 study showed that mental health services accounted for the most common use of telehealth during the early days of the pandemic. In the midst of skyrocketing depression rates, the findings show that more patients used telehealth for behavioral, rather than physical conditions. A report from health insurer Cigna, also released last year, made it clear that businesses have taken notice of this shift to behavioral telehealth: Some 44% of human resources decision-makers and 27% of health plan leaders said that increased access to mental health services will become a long-term solution for their organization. Some 57% of health plan leaders said they had seen the value of mental health services increase more than for most other services and benefits as a result of the coronavirus. For more information: https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/senate-panel-seeks-expand-telehealth-medicare-mental-health-services < Previous News Next News >

Patients Prefer Telehealth for Primary Care, Mental Health Needs Mark Melchionna October 31, 2022 A recent report shows that amid a return to in-person care, telehealth use has dropped among some populations, but it is still a popular modality for accessing primary and mental healthcare. October 31, 2022 - A recent report shows that although in-person care is the preferred channel of care, telehealth use remains highly used among young adults and those engaging in primary care and mental health services. Published by Stericycle Communication Solutions, the report was created in collaboration with Ipsos. It is based on a survey of 1,004 adults, 18 and older, from the continental US, Alaska, and Hawaii, conducted between July 5 and 8. In May 2022, over two years after the start of the pandemic, the FAIR Health Monthly Telehealth Regional Tracker reported an overall 10.2 percent increase in telehealth use. But while evaluating patient preferences related to healthcare access, the 2022 Stericycle Communication Solutions US Consumer Trends in Patient Engagement Survey shows that telehealth use has dropped amid a return to in-person healthcare. Within the year preceding the survey, 45 percent of adults claimed to have used telehealth on at least one occasion, while 25 percent only used it one to two times. This represents a drop from a previous survey, which showed that 39 percent of respondents used telehealth one or two times in the year prior. The report also noted that only 26 percent of older adults accessed telehealth one or more times within the past year. But the share of young adults between 18 and 34 that used telehealth remained high, reaching 61 percent. Further, the report showed that in-person care is popular among healthcare consumers. In total, 44 percent of survey respondents indicated that they prefer in-person visits. However, of those who are open to telehealth, patients prefer virtual visits for certain types of care, including primary care (55 percent) and mental healthcare (45 percent). On the other hand, patients do not prefer virtual visits for specialties such as dermatology, pediatrics, ENT, cardiology, urology, gynecology, orthopedics, and pulmonology. Patient satisfaction with telehealth is high. Among survey respondents, 90 percent indicated that their telehealth experience was either good or excellent. The top reasons for a patient choosing telehealth were convenience (58 percent) or safety (43 percent). Also, 24 percent said that telehealth helped them access a better provider. The report concluded that more evaluation is necessary to continue to optimize telehealth. For instance, since some patients requested in-person care for certain conditions, providers must consider the types of appointments that may be preferred via telehealth and invest accordingly, the report states. Several reports have provided further insight into patient satisfaction with telehealth. A study from the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society in October found that although patients over 65 preferred in-person care, they were also highly satisfied with telehealth. Using a seven-point scale, researchers evaluated the extent to which patients of this age felt satisfied with virtual care. They found that the median patient satisfaction score was six. More research from September found that telehealth continues to play a significant role in healthcare due to the satisfaction it provides patients. Following a survey, researchers found that 67 percent of patients claimed to have used telehealth within the preceding year. Of this population, 94 percent stated their intention to use telehealth again. See original article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/patients-prefer-telehealth-for-primary-care-mental-health-needs < Previous News Next News >

Joint Commission Updates Telemedicine Accreditation Rules Center for Connected Health Policy April 2021 Before a practitioner may provide services in a hospital, he or she must have their qualifications evaluated and verified. According to an article in The National Law Review, The Joint Commission recently announced slightly revised ‘credentialing by proxy rules’. Before a practitioner may provide services in a hospital, he or she must have their qualifications evaluated and verified. This process, known as credentialing, ensures an individual possesses the necessary qualifications to provide medical services to patients. ‘Credentialing by proxy’ allows a hospital receiving services to accept the distant site hospital’s credentialing and privileging decisions. Certain criteria must be met in order for a hospital to qualify to utilize credentialing by proxy. Previously, this included requiring both the originating site hospital and distant site hospital to be accredited with the Joint Commission. The new change allows the distant site telemedicine entity to be accredited with The Joint Commission or, alternatively, enrolled in the Medicare program. The affected standard is MS.13.01.01, EP 1, and is reflected in the Joint Commission’s 2021 update to their Comprehensive Accreditation Manuals. Comprehensive Accreditation Manuals: https://store.jcrinc.com/2021-comprehensive-accreditation-manuals/ < Previous News Next News >

Suicide Prevention and Stigma Reduction with Dr. Alison Arnold Dr. Alison Arnold November 18, 2022 Danielle speaks with Dr. Alison Arnold, the Director Interdisciplinary Center for Community Health & Wellness at Central Michigan University (CMU). In this episode we discuss CMU's Preventing Suicide in Michigan Men (PRiSMM) program and how we utilize telehealth to address mental health disparities and increase access to care. See original article with audio: https://www.umtrc.org/podcasts/season-2-episode-19/ < Previous News Next News >

Sparrow Health System uses pandemic lessons to expand its virtual care strategic plan Bill Siwicki September 28, 2022 Today, the Michigan health system is seeing more than 1,000 e-visits per month, making greater use of its patient portal and successfully addressing the behavioral health caregiver shortage. Sparrow Health System in Lansing, Michigan, began developing a virtual care strategy in October 2019 – well before COVID-19 struck – with the hope of leveraging the technology as a tool to support patient care and the organizational strategy, rather than as a stand-alone strategy in and of itself. Sparrow's initial goal was to launch on-demand, virtual urgent care to increase access and provide another front door into the health system. It intended to go live in July 2020, using Amwell as the technology and services vendor for virtual urgent care for an estimated 1,500 visits in the first year. Telehealth plans quickly changed But then, COVID-19 hit, and plans quickly changed. "With most of our practices closed in late March of 2020, we needed an immediate solution that couldn't wait until July," said Patrick Sustrich, director of retail healthcare at Sparrow Health System. "What we thought would take months took us days, and we leveraged the capability of our Epic EHR to stand up on-demand and scheduled video visits using Zoom for Healthcare and our own providers. "In the first month, we surpassed our one-year goal of 1,500 virtual visits – telephone and video," he continued. "The benefit of staffing this ourselves was that it allowed our providers to access the patient's medical record, document directly into the chart and accept all the same insurance we do for in-person visits." Once the practices reopened, most thought they would resume normal operations and transition all their visits back to in-person. But this did not happen. Patients enjoyed virtual care "Not only was COVID not over, but patients enjoyed the convenience of virtual visits, and providers saw the value of this tool," Sustrich said. "Through August 2022, we have successfully completed more than 144,000 virtual visits. "Additionally, our health system has embarked on a strategy to tend to a situation that has plagued providers since the inception of the patient portal – the overwhelming number of medical advice requests," he continued. In fact, more than 16,000 medical advice requests are received each month. This uncompensated care takes hours out of a provider's day, and a solution was badly needed. Sparrow took a multi-tiered approach to resolve this issue. "The first approach was to leverage Epic to triage medical advice requests to the correct location – one direction for billing/finance, another for medication refills and another for scheduling questions/issues," he explained. "This significantly reduced the number of medical advice requests to the provider. "Next, we launched both patient- and caregiver-initiated e-visits in an effort to convert messages requiring medical decision-making into billable visits," he said. "Monthly reports were generated to providers showing them precisely the opportunity to convert medical advice requests into e-visits." More than 1,000 e-visits per month Although caregiver-initiated e-visits have only been available since Q2 of this year, Sparrow is averaging more than 1,000 e-visits per month. Additionally, a pilot is being conducted to evaluate the impact of using a centralized nurse triage process to resolve minor patient issues, freeing up providers' time to increase access. "Our main hospital campus struggled with LOS and a lack of beds, as most hospitals did during COVID," Sustrich recalled. "We needed to leverage the bed capacity of our community hospitals. We quickly looked for a telehealth solution to prevent unnecessary transfers and keep care local. "iPads with a Zoom video link provided patient-to-provider and provider-to-provider connections," he continued. "FCC funding we received has enabled us to purchase five telemedicine carts from Amwell, allowing an offsite provider to control the camera's pan/tilt/zoom features and access a digital stethoscope." Sparrow intends to place these carts at all five offsite ED locations. In the future, it plans on expanding specialist resources to provide care across the health system. Specialists such as those focused on pulmonology, behavioral health and infectious disease could never be supported at one community hospital, but collectively, and with the help of virtual care, these specialists can serve the entire health system, he stated. Staffing a 24/7 platform "Our current 24/7 on-demand platform's wait time is under 19 minutes, with an average completion rate of more than 80%," Sustrich reported. "It is rare to find a health system staffing its own 24/7 platform while having access to the patient's medical record and the ability to document within the EHR. "Many others have contracted this service out to a third-party vendor, which I believe sacrifices patient care quality and safety," he added. Additionally, Sparrow providers staffing this platform respond to e-visits from patients without a primary care provider, conduct COVID follow-up calls, and perform QR validation in the MySparrow Portal for patients who have received the COVID vaccination outside of the health system. After-hours coverage (8 p.m. – 8 a.m.) is conducted by three ED locations offsite from the main campus. "Another metric I am very proud of is our MySparrow Portal activation rates," Sustrich noted. "Early in the pandemic, it became apparent that patient success with our virtual health services was high in patients who already had a portal account. "In response, a campaign across Sparrow's entire medical group was launched to increase MySparrow Portal activation rates," he continued. "Patient tutorials were created, and the campaign began within ambulatory practices; each practice was given a goal, implemented best practices and shared a monthly scorecard." Caregivers hitting their goals Caregivers were rewarded with gift cards when their practice hit their goal, and the hospital's foundation funded the gift cards. Within two years (April 2020 to March 2022), Sparrow saw a 152% increase in its active MySparrow Portal users (146,768 to 369,916) and increased the percentage of patients with a portal account from 55.2% to 78.8%. The challenges Sparrow faced were similar to those of most other health systems, and this caused Sparrow to build the plane while in flight and struggle with training and experience gaps, Sustrich said. "Our assets included an engaged leadership team that supported our virtual health strategy and was willing to invest in it," he said. "We also leverage Epic and its ongoing development of virtual health tools. And I would be remiss if I didn't mention the resilience of our caregivers." Sustrich points to various signs of success: • More than 70,000 successfully completed video visits in the first two years. • More than $8 million in video visit revenue. • 40,000 hours of patient drive-time saved. • A 10% increase in the SUS Score. • Patient satisfaction went from 80% to 89%. • A 20% shift from telephone to video visits. A major FCC telehealth grant "Sparrow had the top FCC grant application in Michigan and was among 62 healthcare facilities nationwide that received funding from the FCC in Round 2 of its COVID-19 telehealth grant program," Sustrich reported. "The $586,000 was used for ambulatory virtual health hardware deployment, a virtual behavioral health program to expand access and cart technology to increase communication and improve care to our community hospitals out in the region. "Hardware purchased included 115 docking stations, 140 Bluetooth digital scales, 350 headsets, 230 monitors, 115 and keyboards with mouse," he continued. "This standardized virtual health equipment across our health system makes video visits accessible to a larger number of providers, thereby positively impacting patients and increasing access to care." Because of the nationwide shortage of psychiatrists and behavioral therapists, patients find it more difficult to access mental health services. "A portion of the FCC money purchased 40 iPads housed in five emergency rooms and throughout each inpatient floor at the main hospital to access virtual behavioral health services," Sustrich said. "Additionally, psychiatrists at Sparrow's St. Lawrence campus can virtually connect with patients in the adult psychiatric, geriatric psychiatric and outpatient units through an audio/video connection. "This will decrease wait time and increase access to behavioral health services," he concluded. "Additionally, bed capacity will increase from 60% to 85% occupancy." Twitter: @SiwickiHealthIT Email the writer: bsiwicki@himss.org Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication. See original article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/sparrow-health-system-uses-pandemic-lessons-expand-its-virtual-care-strategic-plan < Previous News Next News >

For next steps on telehealth, look to the states By Kat Jercich January 26, 2021 Lawmakers in legislatures nationwide have introduced about 300 bills aimed at expanding access to telemedicine – but not every bill is equally helpful. As the United States approaches its one-year anniversary of the COVID-19 pandemic beginning to disrupt normal healthcare operations, a question continues to endure: What's next for telehealth? The answer remains unclear on a federal level, with U.S. lawmakers recently reintroducing legislation that would take at least a few steps toward safeguarding virtual care. In the meantime, though, state legislatures have taken action – and experts say their movement in this regard is unprecedented. "I've been doing this a long time, and I've never seen anything like this," said Claudia Tucker, senior vice president of government affairs at Teladoc, during the third installment of the American Telemedicine Association's EDGE policy conference on Tuesday. HIMSS20 Digital Learn on-demand, earn credit, find products and solutions. Get Started >> As Tucker described it, lawmakers in nearly every state have introduced about 300 bills in the last few months aimed at expanding access to telemedicine. But, she said, not every one of those bills has equal merit. Some, for instance, require providers to see a patient in-person before allowing audio-only appointments – a move that legislators may not realize will have a chilling effect on care. "State policy matters. When you put clinically unnecessary barriers to care [into place] through state policy … they can be a big deal," noted Quinn Shean, managing director at Tusk Ventures/Tusk Strategies. Shean also noted that many of the hundreds of bills being introduced engage with the "who, what, where and when" of telehealth: what types of providers can provide it, and which modality they can use. "We're seeing states catch up based on their experience in the pandemic," she said. Panelists throughout the day pointed to the double-edged sword of telehealth: It can enable patient access, but it can also deepen the digital divide. "The idea that someone living in Appalachia can have access to one of the best oncologists in the country through telehealth is life changing," said Tucker. As Evan Hoffman, director of state and local government relations, pointed out, virtual care can be instrumental in helping keep struggling rural hospitals open. Telehealth tools, he said, "can beam [provider input] in to support rural hospitals and their efforts to engage patients. The flurry of bill volume cannot be understated in telehealth." At the same time, said Shean, "It's going to be on industry and stakeholders to make sure we do use telehealth as a great equalizer." One potential make-or-break issue when it comes to equity is broadband access – whether patients are able to connect with providers at all. "We have seen, especially in our lower-income areas … the disparity in accessibility widen," said New York State Assembly member Pamela Hunter, D-Syracuse. "We need to make sure that those who need accessibility in care – the most vulnerable – are able to utilize this up-and-coming ... technological health-delivery system," continued Hunter. At this point, she said, "it really is not for everyone." Experts also pointed to coverage and reimbursement as pivotal issues for broader access after the COVID-19 pandemic. "We're going to have to talk about parity," said Minnesota Senator Michelle Benson, R-Anoka. "There is some concern that providers are going to have to be held accountable" for potentially inappropriately charging for services. "I don't know how that looks in statute," Benson admitted. "I hate it when legislators are overly prescriptive," she continued, but maintained that some regulation would undoubtedly be necessary. When it comes to policy progress over the next 100 days, Tucker advised, "follow the money." "There's a huge focus on money, reimbursement, health plans," she said. "It's all about: 'Where does the money go?'" Telehealth, she argued, begets access, quality of care, and savings. "Let's not forget that third one," she emphasized. "The flurry of bill volume cannot be understated in telehealth," noted Hoffman. "It speaks to the tremendous opportunity before us." Shean added that the industry is, for the most part, past the need to simply prove the merits of telehealth. Instead, she said, "We should be using this time of telehealth advancement to be rethinking … to really think bigger." Kat Jercich is senior editor of Healthcare IT News. Twitter: @kjercich Email: kjercich@himss.org Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication. < Previous News Next News >

TELEHEALTH: THE JOURNEY FROM VIDEO VISITS TO STRATEGIC BUSINESS TOOL By Mandy Roth at HealthLeaders April 6, 2021 New approaches to telehealth can help organizations meet their key objectives. KEY TAKEAWAYS: *Asynchronous communication increases provider efficiency and provides a way to address physician shortages. *Virtual hospitals reduce healthcare costs and support the transition to value-based care. *A cloud-based platform enables 24/7 personalized care, moving care upstream to improve outcomes and reduce the cost of care. 2020 was a remarkable year for healthcare innovation, and telehealth finally achieved scale across the industry. Driven by a need to deliver healthcare at a distance, hospitals and health systems stood up new services seemingly overnight, fanned the flames under languishing programs, or found new uses for thriving virtual care initiatives. Now that telehealth has become a fixture in the healthcare delivery firmament, it's time to examine what comes next. While current use predominantly focuses on televisits between providers and patients, and mysteries remain about reimbursement and licensure issues after COVID-19, forward-thinking healthcare executives are using the technology to enable new models of care. Health systems are employing telehealth to transform healthcare delivery in ways that address strategic business objectives: improve outcomes, reduce provider burden, enhance patient experience, improve access, and ameliorate workforce labor issues. HealthLeaders spoke to visionary leaders and digital healthcare experts who shared their insights and perspectives about what organizations should focus on now, next, and in the future to unlock the potential of telehealth. Coverage includes case studies about asynchronous care, remote monitoring, and a futuristic cloud-based platform fueled by artificial intelligence. Health systems shared details about how these initiatives work and how they evaluated the return on investment. These new approaches to telehealth can help organizations meet their strategic objectives and provide information to inspire other organizations on their own telehealth journeys. WHAT'S NOW: PRESBYTERIAN HEALTHCARE SERVICES ENHANCES EFFICIENCY WITH ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION Strategic Objectives: *Increase provider efficiency and address physician shortages *Reduce costs per patient encounter *Reduce ER and urgent care utilization At the beginning of 2020, physicians and consumers had not yet fully embraced the concept of virtual video visits; many were skeptical about the ability to deliver care effectively in this manner. Yet after the pandemic forced the adoption of virtual visits, their reputation and usage forever changed. Today, asynchronous communication faces the same hurdles. Providers and patients don't understand how it works and question its value. "It's a technology whose time has not yet come," says Oliver Lignell, vice president of virtual health at health system consultancy AVIA, which helps members accelerate their digital transformation initiatives. "It's not yet mainstream, but it should be." Presbyterian Healthcare Services, an Albuquerque, New Mexico–based nonprofit integrated healthcare delivery system, began investigating this approach to healthcare four years ago. "It's been incredibly effective," says Ries Robinson, MD, senior vice president and chief innovation officer. Between the system's nine hospitals and a health plan it offers, the organization serves a third of the state's residents. With a shortage of practitioners in New Mexico, and 70% of the care it provides covered by capitated contracts, Presbyterian needed to find a way to operate more efficiently. Asynchronous communication worked. Last year, a designated group of employed urgent care physicians handled 50,000 asynchronous visits for low-acuity care, and spent an average of two minutes on each encounter—far less than the 15–18 minutes it takes to conduct a typical video call. This form of care does not occur in real time. Depending on the platform used, a patient completes and submits an online form via secure email, text, or an app, detailing his or her complaint and relevant history. A physician receives the information, processes it, and sends a response back to the patient with instructions and prescriptions, if necessary. Presbyterian physicians usually respond within 15 minutes; some health systems using asynchronous communication allow up to 24 hours. There is no direct audio or video exchange with the patient unless the physician thinks it is warranted and escalates the encounter. Asynchronous communication offers some distinct advantages to health systems, say the experts. Synchronous care, which includes video, audio, and in-person visits, comes with an Achilles' heel: Regardless of venue, the physician spends about the same amount of one-to-one time with the patient, says digital medicine expert Ashish Atreja, MD, MPH, chief information and digital health officer at UC Davis Health in Sacramento, California. "The real growth you're going to see in value," he says, "is the ability to deliver one-to-many care." Asynchronous communication is a step in that direction. "One of the most important things asynchronous communication does is help scale response," says Ann Mond Johnson, MBA, MHA, CEO of the American Telemedicine Association. In addition, because patients can use it with a phone or the internet, it can address issues of access, she says. Robinson says the SmartExam™ platform Presbyterian is using, made by Bright.md, includes features that appeal to its physicians. It automatically enters chart-ready SOAP (Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan) notes into the electronic medical record (EMR), creates billing files, and manages patient follow-up communications. "It's extremely elegant," says Robinson. SmartExam's design, which asks patients questions in an interview-style exchange, and advanced logic has earned the trust of the physicians who use it, he says. "I remember the first time [physicians] said, 'I trust it'; I thought that was kind of a funny term to use," Robinson recalls. When he asked the doctors what they meant, they explained that the tool is thorough and consistent in a way humans cannot replicate. "That's what the providers really like." Even the best medical assistant, he says, may vary in how they ask questions of patients, forget to include certain details, or package assessments differently. While Robinson says the health system has detailed financial models that justify the cost of the platform, he declines to disclose the figures, but notes, "It hasn't been an astronomical investment by any stretch of the imagination." Expenses include a one-time cost for EMR integration, ongoing charges for using the platform on a per-patient per-use basis, and marketing and promotion. He also provides formulas to calculate estimated cost savings. They include: *Better utilization of providers' time and related staffing expenses, by reducing each of 50,000 encounters from 15–18 minutes for a video encounter to two minutes for an asynchronous visit. *More appropriate ER usage. Out of 50,000 patients, 8% were redirected away from the ER. This figure is based on patient survey responses indicating they would have visited the ER had the platform not been available. With an average ER visit costing more than $500, says Robinson, "there's a significant savings." *Reduced workload at urgent care facilities. "Just assume 20,000 [of these patients] would have gone to an urgent care that we own," he says. The time and expense of urgent care staffing is used to calculate the savings. Patients also save money, says AVIA's Lignell. Nationally, he says the typical cost for an asynchronous visit is about $20, and many health systems offer these visits for free. This compares to a national average cost of $50 for a video visit and $125 for an in-person visit. There is one additional element that has contributed to the success of asynchronous visits for Presbyterian: a digital front door. Patients visit the pres.today webpage, enter their condition and insurance information, and are automatically directed to the appropriate level of care, one of which includes the option for online visits (using asynchronous care). Because of the asynchronous initiative's success, the health system is expanding its use beyond low-acuity care. Future plans involve developing new uses for the platform, capturing symptoms and history to create greater efficiencies for video visits and even in-person care. "We have gotten religion around the idea of capturing as much information as you can in a sophisticated manner before the visit," says Robinson. "You maximize the quality of care and the efficiency of the visit. We're taking that idea and pushing it forward in multiple avenues of care here at Presbyterian." Value-based care will drive further adoption of these models, says Lignell. "The advantages from a total cost of care standpoint are huge," he says. "It's much less expensive to deliver care this way." While the bulk of growth has been in low-acuity primary care, he says asynchronous care is now being explored in specialty and higher-acuity care, as well as in e-consults between providers. "The asynchronous model is proving to be incredibly efficient for health systems," says Lignell. "That's one of the reasons why it has so much promise." WHAT'S NEXT: ATRIUM HEALTH LAUNCHES A VIRTUAL HOSPITAL Strategic Objectives: *Increase bed capacity, limit staff and patient exposure to COVID-19, and conserve PPE *Reduce costs and support the transition to value-based care *Improve patient satisfaction and experience "Remote patient management is widening the aperture from the episodic-based healthcare reality that we've known for decades towards a 24/7, always-on ubiquitous reality," says Rasu Shrestha, MD, MBA, executive vice president and chief strategy and transformation officer at Atrium Health. Long before COVID-19 hit American shores, health systems began launching remote monitoring programs, particularly to manage chronic diseases. Hospital at home initiatives, or virtual hospitals, are a robust manifestation of this endeavor. While these models have demonstrated cost savings, adoption has been slow due to reimbursement issues. The pandemic offered a trifecta of motivating factors to accelerate adoption of the virtual hospital model: bed capacity issues, a need to limit staff and patient exposure, and dwindling supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE). With these issues in mind, during March 2020 a handful of clinicians approached Atrium Health administrators, suggesting that the 42-hospital Charlotte, North Carolina–based nonprofit health system consider launching a hospital at home initiative. Two weeks later it was operational, says Scott Rissmiller, MD, executive vice president and chief physician executive. In the first 10 months, the virtual hospital admitted 51,000 patients. "We are able to keep patients in their homes, protect our teammates from infection, and also protect patients," Rissmiller says. "It freed up a good bit of capacity in our acute facility," enabling the health system to reserve that space for its more acute COVID-19 patients. The virtual hospital maintains two "floors." The first floor functions as an observation unit; the second floor is reserved for patients requiring more intensive care, says Rissmiller. Any COVID-19-positive patient is admitted to the first floor of the virtual hospital and receives digital tools to monitor temperature, blood pressure, pulse, and oxygen levels. These devices deliver data via Bluetooth® to a smartphone app developed by the health system's IT department. That data feeds into the patient's EMR, fully integrating into the patient's continuum of care, Rissmiller explains. In a bunker back at Atrium Health's call center, a team of clinicians monitors data and checks in with first-floor patients daily. Second-floor virtual patients have the same home monitoring tools, but receive "much more intensive management" and frequent check-ins, he says. In addition, community-based paramedics visit homes to administer IV fluids, IV antibiotics, breathing treatments, EKGs, and other interventions. This arrangement created additional opportunities to reduce hospital bed capacity. "We were one of the first in the nation to get in-home remdesivir, one of the COVID treatments," says Rissmiller. "To receive remdesivir, you have to be on oxygen therapy, so these patients are sick." In a 10-month period, Atrium Health administered about 150 therapeutic rounds of the drug, he says, which saved about 500 hospital days that would have been required if those patients had been hospitalized. "From a quality standpoint, we do not view this any differently than if these patients were within the walls of our hospital," says Rissmiller. All measures, including length of stay as well as readmission, transfer, and mortality rates, have been almost identical to inpatient stats, and patient satisfaction has been "extremely high," he says. "Patients really would rather be in their home surrounded by their loved ones and support system." The hospital at home initiative has been a "costly endeavor," says Rissmiller. "When we realized this pandemic was going to be significant, our CEO [and President Eugene Woods, MBA, MHA, FACHE] called me and said, 'Scott, whatever you need to care for our patients and communities—do it. We'll figure out the costs later.' It freed us up to be able to do things like this." As it turned out, costs have been offset by funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), which enable Atrium Health to bill for many of the services provided. The organization also is one of a handful of healthcare systems that are doing a pilot with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, which views virtual beds as real hospital beds. "The reimbursement is similar because of the level of service we're providing," says Rissmiller. Initially, though, "it was all upfront costs for us, but the return was in bed days." A focus on reimbursement continues "as we are now maturing the program," he says. "Our concern is that the reimbursement will go away once those [pandemic] emergency orders expire. We're working with the state, our payers, Medicare, and others to make sure that this continues to be reimbursed at a level that allows us to continue to grow it and cover our costs." "Out of necessity, COVID ultimately accelerated health systems' desire to think through their digital strategies and determine how digital fits into their overall care and business models," says Brian Kalis, MBA, managing director of digital health and innovation in consulting firm Accenture's health practice. "New models are starting to pop up, and care is shifting to the home." Strategic goals include producing outcomes that equal or exceed inpatient care, while also improving labor productivity, Kalis says. "A majority of health systems coming out of COVID are putting care at home as a key strategic focus. That requires a collection of new models to deliver care, putting different care team compositions in place, and [utilizing] technology to help a broad range of conditions for pre-acute, acute, and post-acute care." Atrium's virtual hospital has already expanded beyond COVID-19 patients. Once the surge diminished in July, Rissmiller "challenged the team to look at [the initiative] through the lens of a non-COVID world. Can this become a new way of caring for patients that makes sense to the patient and to us as a healthcare system?" There is now a list of 10 diagnoses to be considered for hospital at home care, and congestive heart failure patients have already been admitted into the virtual facility. "We're starting to branch out," he says. "We're also starting to focus on different communities to make sure that we're doing this in a way that helps with our underserved populations and gives them the resources they need to manage care at home rather than coming through the emergency department." While Atrium Health rolled out its program in two weeks, Rissmiller says, "this is something that would be incredibly hard to start up on your own if you hadn't had the 10 years of virtual experience that we've had building these capabilities, but also the confidence to be able to deliver these kinds of services at home. It takes a while for clinicians to understand that care can be delivered safely virtually. We also have a culture at Atrium Health that really enables our clinical leaders to lead and their voices to be heard. That, more than anything, is the secret sauce that's allowed for innovations like hospital at home." WHAT'S IN THE FUTURE: HIGHMARK HEALTH DEVELOPS PLATFORM TO DRIVE 24/7 CARE Strategic Objectives: *Move care upstream to improve outcomes *Reduce cost of care, patient traffic, and volume *Enable 24/7 personalized care Unleashing the potential of virtual care requires strategic innovation fueled by imagination. Highmark Health is one organization traveling along this path. To understand the power of an initiative now underway at the Pittsburgh-based payer-provider system, one must imagine the potential to do something that is currently not possible. For example, take the hypothetical case of an individual living independently at home with six medical conditions. What if real-time data alerts her care team that her health status has subtly changed? What if this alert takes the complexity of her medical history into account and offers decision-support tools to accelerate clinical action before her health deteriorates? The Living Health Model, fueled by the Living Health Dynamic Platform—a Google Cloud–based technology infused with artificial intelligence and advanced analytics—could be the missing link that will enable care to move upstream. The concept revolutionizes the current perception of telehealth and enables 24/7 care. It aims to connect the provider, patient, and payer in novel ways to improve health outcomes, reduce clinician administrative burdens, enhance patient engagement, and reduce costs, says Karen Hanlon, executive vice president and chief operating officer at Highmark Health. "We believe that we have the capabilities and resources to pull it together," says Tony Farah, MD, FACC, FSCAI, Highmark Health's executive vice president and chief medical and clinical transformation officer, who is also a practicing cardiologist. The platform will amplify the impact of remote monitoring tools, which many health systems already use for chronic disease management. By adding sophisticated data analytics, machine learning, decision support, and patient education tools, the system will support comprehensive care rather than managing diseases in silos, Farah says. "Our partnership with Google Cloud is going to not only accelerate our strategy, but also help us scale it." Data will be constantly mined to determine the "next best action" required to proactively care for a patient and formulate a personalized care plan that delivers a "curated" experience based on the patient's personal needs, says Hanlon. For patients with no apparent health conditions, the system may focus on wellness. While full realization of this concept may be years down the road, Hanlon says the first iteration of the platform will be functional at the end of 2021. Accenture cloud expert Geoff Schmidt, managing director, global lead—life sciences technology, says Highmark Health's plans align with what he's seeing in the life sciences sector. Health leaders should not think of the cloud as a capability or an IT initiative, he says; "think of it as a business transformation enabler." Cloud technology is accelerating companies' three- to five-year strategic plans, compressing those timelines down to 12 to 18 months. "We're seeing dramatic transformations and acceleration of CEO agendas because of the capability that the cloud can provide." Partnering with an outside player is a smart move for health systems that want to expedite their transformation initiatives, says Schmidt. "Major technology partners are innovating at a scale that is, just frankly, hard for payers or providers to keep up with." Prior to its partnership with Google Cloud, Highmark Health piloted "analog" proofs of concept, according to Farah. These pilots involved addressing healthcare for several patient populations, including high-risk patients with multiple comorbidities as well as individual chronic conditions like COPD, heart failure, diabetes, and hypertension. Physicians were asked to improve health outcomes in 12 months. "The patient experience went through the roof, and in almost every case—with the exception of diabetes—the total cost of care came down," says Farah. "I would say physician engagement was our secret sauce." "Consumer engagement is also a key component," says Hanlon. "There are a lot of solutions out there. They're very siloed and they're not integrated. We can have the best solutions in the world, but if the consumer and the clinician are not using them, they will have no impact." While Highmark Health does not disclose the company's investment in this platform, "you can guess that it is a fair amount," says Hanlon. In addition to activating the initiative at Allegheny Health Network, a nonprofit health system that Highmark owns and operates, "at the same time we're a health plan serving 5.6 million members," she says. "The ability to interact with all of those members is incredibly important to us. When you look across our book of business, we're probably managing somewhere in the neighborhood of $26 billion in healthcare costs a year. When we look at the investments that are needed to support that base of membership and that level of healthcare spend, we feel it's appropriate and we can justify the investment." Being both a payer and a provider imbues Highmark Health with the motivation and influence to transform healthcare delivery in this way, Hanlon says. The company is a Blue Cross Blue Shield–affiliated payer operating in three states, and also functions as a provider through the Allegheny Health Network. "By having both of those assets in the portfolio," says Hanlon, "it's easier for us to align on the path forward and the economic model." But to characterize this venture merely as a mechanism to save money misses the point, she says. The model is designed to improve patient outcomes by moving care upstream, explains Farah. "Conditions that exist today will be prevented from deteriorating, and conditions that haven't developed will be prevented—or, at a minimum, be delayed in development. That's the primary goal, and it results in a reduction in total cost of care. It flips the equation from focusing on finances to focusing on health." In addition, for the Living Health Model to be effective, it must work with entities outside of the facilities owned by the Highmark Health system, which provides health plans in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and West Virginia. Allegheny Health Network operates facilities in 29 Pennsylvania counties and portions of New York, Ohio, and West Virginia. "We're looking to have impact across all of the markets that we serve as our insurance company, not just where we own a provider asset," says Hanlon. "The progression of value-based care has been a slow march. I think this platform will be a tool to enable providers to continue down that path. Part of our focus is developing other tools we believe will be necessary for the providers to succeed in a value-based environment. We recognize that we're going to have to be a leader in helping others to move down that path." A FRAMEWORK FOR MOVING FORWARD Planning for the future of telehealth requires rethinking the present. "If the only way that you look at telehealth is as a way to replace one-to-one physical visits with a telehealth visit, you're not changing the world; you're just creating a little bit more convenience," says Roy Schoenberg, MD, MPH, president and CEO of Amwell, a Boston-based technology company that provides telehealth technology to health systems. "If you look at telehealth as a product, you're going to end up behind the competitive landscape curve. If you look at telehealth as an operating system, [it becomes a] mechanism for the digital distribution of care." Transforming the way healthcare is delivered requires changing, from the ground up, the way health systems think about their relationships with patients, Schoenberg says. Telehealth can alter dynamics related to patient traffic and volume, patient flow, transitions of care, and assumption of risk. "When you equip yourself with telehealth capabilities," Schoenberg says, "you should ask yourself, 'Does the system that I buy allow me to create new applications for telehealth that the vendor didn't think about?' [You] should imagine plans for patients that incorporate and take advantage of telehealth. The result of that is a completely different beast." This article appears in the March/April 2021 edition of HealthLeaders magazine. - https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/telehealth/telehealth-journey-video-visits-strategic-business-tool < Previous News Next News >

The value of telehealth and the move to digitally enabled care — 3 insights Becker's Hospital Review In Collaboration with American Medical Association Nov. 1, 2021 During the pandemic, healthcare organizations embraced telehealth to ensure they could provide access and high quality care to their patients. Now, nearly two years later, organizations are contemplating how best to move forward, including how to safeguard and optimize opportunities to move towards digitally enabled care. During the pandemic, healthcare organizations embraced telehealth to ensure they could provide access and high quality care to their patients. Now, nearly two years later, organizations are contemplating how best to move forward, including how to safeguard and optimize opportunities to move towards digitally enabled care. During Becker's 6th Annual Health IT + Revenue Cycle Virtual Conference, the American Medical Association sponsored a roundtable discussion on this topic. The AMA's Lori Prestesater, Vice President of Health Solutions, and Meg Barron, Vice President of Digital Health Innovations, talked with healthcare executives from around the country about their digital health successes and challenges. Three insights: 1. Providers want virtual care to continue as long as their key concerns are addressed. "Physicians are enthusiastic about digital health technologies," Ms. Barron said. "However, that enthusiasm is directly tied to a solution's ability to help them take better care of patients or reduce their administrative burdens." Four key concerns consistently expressed by physicians when evaluating digital solutions are whether a solution works and has an evidence base, how providers will be compensated, what liability and privacy issues exist, and how implementation and change management will occur. 2. One of the major advantages of telehealth is improved access. Access can be widely defined; virtual technology has made significant inroads in improving access in multiple ways: COVID-19 access. The department chair of a hospital in the Northeast noted that telehealth helped them provide quick access and treatment to patients during the pandemic. "It worked extremely well in this emergency situation," he said. "Patients would call in and report symptoms, and we could make decisions about their care. We provided pulse oximeters and followed up via telehealth." Specialty access. A CMO from a Midwestern health network — who is the father of a daughter with a chronic illness — shared his personal experience with specialty care from multiple systems. "I can't imagine how my daughter could receive specialty care without telehealth. Care that was previously siloed can now be accessed nationally, if not internationally." Behavioral health access. A chief population health officer from a health system in the Midwest said telehealth access to mental health services was a big success. "Patients found the pandemic very rough, and many needed some behavioral health services, but they didn't necessarily want to try to see somebody because of the stigma associated with it," she said. "Being able to offer telebehavioral health services to our patients, and frankly, even to our employees, was a great success." 3. Challenges such as patient hesitancy, bandwidth issues and measurement of value remain. Although patients are generally positive about telehealth, some have found it difficult to onboard to telehealth platforms. One provider in the Northeast said younger patients love the ability to text and connect virtually, but elderly patients often prefer in-person visits for the human connection. Also, many healthcare organizations have faced connection issues. A West Coast CMO explained, "We have 24 hospitals, and many of them are in rural areas. We really struggled with bandwidth." Finally, measuring the value of these technologies remains a challenge. Ms. Prestesater pointed out that it can be a "many-year equation to evaluate the value for a chronically ill patient." AMA has a recently released Return on Health value framework that can help an organization quantify the comprehensive value of virtual care. Although some participants warned that virtual care may not be less expensive, it can be hard to quantify savings from things like avoiding emergency care. A Midwest hospital executive said, "Home-based care has led to a substantial reduction in visits to the emergency room and days in the hospital for us. The problem in the whole equation is it's hard to measure something that doesn't happen." < Previous News Next News >

HHS-OIG Reports on Pandemic Medicare Telehealth Trends to Inform Permanent Policies Center for Connected Health Policy Nov. 2, 2021 The Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG) released a telehealth report on October 18th that looked at the relationship between providers and Medicare patients utilizing telehealth between March and December 2020. Specifically, HHS-OIG examined encounter claims data to determine the presence of pre-existing relationships, dates of any prior visits, and the types of services provided. The Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG) released a telehealth report on October 18th that looked at the relationship between providers and Medicare patients utilizing telehealth between March and December 2020. Specifically, HHS-OIG examined encounter claims data to determine the presence of pre-existing relationships, dates of any prior visits, and the types of services provided. Interestingly, it was found that though pre-pandemic requirements limiting telehealth visits to established patients were waived, 84% of visits still occurred within those parameters. In addition, as policymakers consider making some telehealth pandemic policies permanent, some stakeholders have suggested a need to require an in-person visit within a certain period of time in order to be eligible for a telehealth visit. However, the data collected by HHS-OIG shows such requirements may not be necessary, as Medicare patients were found to already have had an in-person visit on average within four months prior to the telehealth visit without such a requirement. Additional findings included: Beneficiaries most commonly received e-visits, virtual check-ins, and telephone evaluation and management services via telehealth from providers with whom they had an established relationship Beneficiaries received about 45.5 million office visits delivered via telehealth, which accounted for nearly half of all telehealth services 86% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries received a telehealth service from providers with whom they had an established relationship, compared to 81% of Medicare Advantage Beneficiaries who received home visits via telehealth, which represented only 1% of all services provided via telehealth, were the least likely to have an established relationship with their providers The average amount of time between beneficiaries’ in-person visits and their first telehealth services varied by type of service Beneficiaries who received home visits via telehealth had an in-person visit with their providers at an average of around 9 months prior to first telehealth service Beneficiaries who received nursing home visits and assisted living visits via telehealth had an in-person visit at an average of 2 months prior to their first telehealth service HHS-OIG notes that the provision of this data seeks to inform policymakers looking at long-term telehealth policy and making certain pandemic expansions permanent, especially in light of concerns around telehealth fraud and abuse. For instance, it could help in examining the necessity of one of the most controversial, and confusing, permanent federal changes made thus far as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, which post-PHE will require an initial in-person visit within 6-months of a tele-behavioral health visit for purposes of Medicare reimbursement. However, the requirement only applies if the service is not provided in a geographically rural area and at a qualifying medical facility. There is also an exception for treatment of substance use disorder and co-occurring mental health treatment. In addition, CMS is proposing to make the 6-month in-person visit a requirement for subsequent visits in the proposed calendar year 2022 physician fee schedule. For non-behavioral health visits, the 6-month requirement wouldn’t apply, however patients would need to be located in a rural area and eligible facility type to qualify for Medicare reimbursement. Some Medicaid programs are considering limiting telehealth use to established patients, occasionally also applying restrictions to specific modalities and services. However, the HHS-OIG findings may suggest that it is unnecessary to limit telehealth to certain patients and services to prevent fraud and abuse as standard practice may already be providing sufficient guardrails in those respects. In addition, the study findings could indicate that the issue may be more related to general standard of care concerns that apply across all services, not just those delivered via telehealth. The balance may then include looking at how to manage health care fraud generally, which elsewhere HHS-OIG has clarified that most fraud is not telehealth specific. The issue could then boil down to how much autonomy to provide clinicians when making medical determinations, including when a telehealth visit is appropriate. Typically oversight in that respect has been under the purview of clinical licensing boards, not governed by general laws, but as we shift outside of the pandemic it is possible we may see additional shifts in terms of these policy approaches. As policymakers balance these multiple findings, perspectives and concerns, it remains to be seen how such data will be applied or used to justify permanent policies. It will also be important to continue to weigh these factors against general access to care issues so as to not inadvertently limit telehealth as a means of ensuring patients can receive necessary medical services. Additional information on the HHS-OIG study can be found by viewing the brief and complete report. < Previous News Next News >

Building Lasting Tele-Behavioral Health Programs to Address Patient Needs Kat Jercich, Healthcare IT News. August 2021 In a HIMSS21 Global Conference Digital session, two experts discuss what it's taken for the University of Rochester to spin up a virtual behavioral health program over the past nine years. Telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic has allowed many patients – especially those in under-resourced areas – unprecedented access to behavioral healthcare. But as Michael Hasselberg, senior director of digital health at the University of Rochester, discussed with Cleveland Clinic Director of Design and Best Practices Julie Rish during a HIMSS21 Global Conference Digital session, such programs have required being nimble and adaptable in the face of changing needs. Hasselberg outlined the results of a tele-behavioral health model in effect at the University of Rochester, explaining that it grew from a pilot program aimed at primary care doctors to a full-scale initiative in nearly a decade. But the pandemic, he says, ramped up demand – and the supply had to change in response. "Like every health system in the entire country, overnight you had to flip the switch on, and essentially totally pivot to telemedicine," he said. Having the infrastructure and years of experience allowed the team to shift within about a week to providing behavioral health services nearly entirely virtually. Even as vaccines have become more readily available, Hasselberg estimates that about 60% of the team's ambulatory services are being provided via telemedicine. Interestingly, considering reports from other parts of the country, Hasselberg said the team has not encountered patient difficulties with broadband access, even in rural areas – thanks in part to state government efforts to ensure connectivity throughout the region. But one challenge, he said, has been gaining community trust and support. "Learning to build those community partnerships, identify how the stakeholders are, doing focus groups … has allowed us to be successful," he said. For other organizations looking to replicate the university's success, he said, start by reaching out to providers already in place. "Build that partnership there. Find out where their struggles may be, where the gaps may be, how you can join forces to fill those gaps and truly partner," he advised. He also suggests approaching the programs as iterative – being agile and flexible, and not allowing perfect to be the enemy of good. "Just get something out there: See what works and what doesn't work, and continue to build off of that," he said. It's also vital to remember that not every service can be done via telehealth, he said. Having a support network to assist patients with technology is enormously helpful. Rish noted that it's not just about access alone. It's also about comfort and about trust. "Having somebody from your team who can get to the community, who can be onsite – that's really important," said Hasselberg. Hasselberg said it's been useful to examine who can most benefit from telehealth because of transportation hurdles or other barriers to in-person care. "Finding parking at an academic medical center is not an easy thing to do!" he laughed. By merging that information with electronic health record data, he said, the team can get specific about how best to target services. As far as care delivery predictions, Hasselberg said he saw telemedicine as the "tip of the iceberg." "I think the future of behavioral health will be an a la carte array of options," he said. < Previous News Next News >

82% of Americans Want Telehealth Flexibilities Extended Mark Melchionna November 30, 2022 A recent survey indicates that 82 percent of respondents with employer-provided coverage believe that the government should extend telehealth flexibilities. A recent survey conducted by America's Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) found that a majority of respondents are requesting that the government sustain the telehealth flexibilities enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2020, the number of people using telehealth increased dramatically, largely due to the withdrawal of various regulatory restrictions as well as the new barriers imposed on in-person care. According to data from market research firm Trilliant Health, telehealth use peaked in the second quarter of 2020. Though telehealth use has waned since 2020, it remains popular among patients and providers. As a result, Congress is faced with deciding whether to continue or terminate telehealth flexibilities. A survey from the Morning Consult on behalf of AHIP’s Coverage@Work campaign collected data on patient preferences regarding telehealth and how they feel about its future. The survey polled 818 voters with employer health insurance between Nov. 11 and 13. The main survey findings related to whether patients would consider seeing a doctor through telehealth, reasons for using telehealth, and their opinions on the government extending telehealth flexibilities. The survey shows that 65 percent of those with employer-provided coverage reported being likely to consider seeing a doctor or receiving treatment through telehealth. This finding was consistent across age, income, and ethnicity groups. Also, 49 percent claimed that interest in telehealth is mainly backed by convenience, and 35 percent stated that it saves time as it eliminates the need for travel. Among all respondents, 82 percent believe that the federal government extending telehealth flexibilities is important. This included a bipartisan majority of Democratic voters (95 percent), independent voters (77 percent), and Republican voters (70 percent). Considering the survey results, AHIP concluded that respondents would advocate for the government to continue telehealth flexibilities. This is not the first indication of healthcare stakeholders seeking this end goal. In September, a letter to the US Senate composed by the American Telemedicine Association (ATA) and its advocacy arm known as ATA Action asked for a continuation of expanded telehealth access. Specifically, the letter urged the US Senate to sustain telehealth flexibilities for two years through 2024. These flexibilities included waivers put into place during the pandemic, including removing initial in-person requirements for telemental health and eliminating restrictions on the location of providers and patients engaging in telehealth. Signed by 375 stakeholders, such as Amazon, the American Nurses Association, and Bicycle Health, the letter also detailed concerns about a forced return to in-person care. Also, in March, Senators Tom Carper (D-Delaware) and Tim Scott (R-South Carolina) introduced a bill known as the Hospital Inpatient Services Act, which allowed for a two-year extension of the federal acute hospital-at-home waiver. Introduced in November 2020 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the waiver enables treatment for common acute conditions in home settings. This waiver was highly used throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, with 92 health systems, comprising 203 hospitals across 34 states, using it as of March 4. See original article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/82-of-americans-want-telehealth-flexibilities-extended < Previous News Next News >

Recent DOJ Fraud Charges Include Few Details and Links to Telehealth Center for Connected Health Policy June 2021 The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced criminal charges against a variety of individuals related to various alleged COVID-19 fraud schemes. One of the kickback schemes does appear to include a telehealth element. The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced criminal charges against a variety of individuals related to various alleged COVID-19 fraud schemes. Most of the new cases appear to be related to fraudulent testing claims and kickback schemes, although one of the kickback schemes does appear to include a telehealth element. According to the DOJ press release, two Florida men – a consultant as well as a Texas laboratory owner – allegedly exploited temporary telehealth waivers by offering providers access to Medicare beneficiaries for whom they could bill consultations. In return, the providers referred the patients to that laboratory for potentially unnecessary cancer and cardiovascular genetic testing. Despite potentially misleading headlines, most charges appear to only be against executives and additional details directly tying the fraud to telehealth and the correspondence, billing, and waivers in question have yet to be released. As one updated mHealth Intelligence article later noted, “the charges try to link fraud cases to telehealth coverage, but are more closely aligned with telefraud.” For more information read the full DOJ press release - https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/doj-announces-coordinated-law-enforcement-action-combat-health-care-fraud-related-covid-19. < Previous News Next News >

Legislators Throughout the Southwest are Moving Towards Institutionalizing Telehealth Services Kirin Goff, Southwest Telehealth Resource Center July 2021 Legislatures across the southwest have sprung into action to enact bills that permanently expand telehealth services As the COVID-19 pandemic becomes increasingly under control and more states are ending their public health emergency declarations, legislatures across the southwest have sprung into action to enact bills that permanently expand telehealth services. At the forefront of this new legislation is Arizona’s HB 2454 that Governor Doug Ducey signed into law on March 5, 2021 to provide comprehensive amendments to the state's laws governing telehealth. In Arizona and other southwest states’ new telehealth laws, entities are generally prohibited from denying coverage for telehealth services and are required to cover remotely provided services at the same rate as equivalent in-person services. Exceptions to these requirements may be developed by an advisory committee of government officials, practitioners, and other stakeholders, who will determine, among other things, circumstances in which telehealth services are inappropriate. Even in the absence of a rule prohibiting telehealth services, healthcare providers must use good faith in determining whether telehealth services are appropriate, and if so, which communication modalities are appropriate. Communication Modalities Prior to the public health emergency response to the pandemic, audio-only services were generally permissible only if the healthcare provider had an existing relationship with the patient and audio-visual communication was not reasonably available. Voicemail was specifically excluded. Going forward, telehealth services in Arizona may be provided, when appropriate, through interactive audio/video, asynchronous store-and-forward technology (i.e., digitally stored medical imaging, multimedia files, other information that can be reviewed remotely), and remote patient monitoring technology. Legislation in other states throughout the southwest also includes measures that govern the types of communications by which telehealth services can be provided. In many cases, telehealth can be provided by means other than real-time, audio-visual communication. Nevada SB 5, for example, amends an existing definition of telehealth to include audio-only interactions. Utah's SB 161, which was enacted, allows providers to use HIPAA-compliant asynchronous audiovisual technology for certain treatments. Amendments to New Mexico's Cannabis Regulation Act (HB 2, also enacted) provide a patient to be diagnosed as a qualified patient via telemedicine, which includes store-and-forward and remote patient monitoring technologies as options. Collection and Reporting of Telehealth Data to Form Policy Decisions Legislators in Nevada, like those in Arizona, seek to collect and use data on telehealth services to aid in forming policy. Nevada SB 5 requires the state's Department of Health and Human Services to establish (if funding permits) a data dashboard allowing analysis of access to telehealth by different groups and populations. The bill goes further to include behavioral health boards, the Patient Protection Commission, and the Legislative Committee on Health Care to use the dashboard in formulating policy. Another Nevada bill (ACR 5) establishes a legislative committee to address the shortage of behavioral health professionals in the state. This committee will study the provision of behavioral health services through telehealth and consider ways to expand the use of telehealth to provide such services. Expansion of Services Various bills explicitly expand telehealth services in particular fields such as dentistry (Colorado SB 21-139, New Mexico SB 200), audiology and speech pathology (Colorado SB 21-021, New Mexico HB 210), occupational therapy (Colorado HB 21-1279), and dietetics and nutrition (New Mexico HB 147). Other measures are aimed at expanding broadband access:(Nevada AB 388; Colorado HB 21-1109), including efforts specifically directed at underserved communities (Arizona HB 2885, Nevada AB 388), seniors (Colorado SB 21-210, New Mexico SM 6), and children (New Mexico SM 15). In-Person Medical Examination Requirements In-person requirements have long been a contentious topic in the provision of initial telehealth services in certain contexts. For example, Arizona’s HB 2454 prohibits providers from prescribing Schedule II drugs after an audio-only communication with the patient, but generally allows other drugs to be prescribed after audio-only telehealth communications. In another context, Nevada’s SB 266 provides for in-person medical examinations for workers' compensation claims, but only if initial examinations were performed through telehealth services and only if a party requests an in-person examination. Interestingly, some bills seek to relax restrictions. For example, New Mexico’s HB 12 seeks to eliminate a previous requirement that a practitioner could only certify a patient for medical cannabis use if the practitioner had previously examined the patient in-person. Overall, the surge of bills moves us towards institutionalizing telehealth. Importantly, the latest round of legislation also exposes how much more there is to learn about optimizing telehealth and identifying best practices as uptake continues to increase across the southwest. New Mexico HB 147: https://track.govhawk.com/public/bills/1414538 New Mexico SM 6: https://track.govhawk.com/public/bills/1425880 New Mexico SM 15: https://track.govhawk.com/public/bills/1443803 New Mexico’s HB 12: https://track.govhawk.com/public/bills/1428580 Source: https://southwesttrc.org/blog/2021/legislators-throughout-southwest-are-moving-towards-institutionalizing-telehealth < Previous News Next News >

OIG Looking Closely at Telehealth as it Weighs Future Enforcement Mike Miliard, Healthcare IT News August 2021 In a HIMSS21 session with updates on the HHS inspector general's oversight and compliance efforts, officials said they plan to ensure virtual care is provided with integrity, and will take aim at telehealth fraud schemes. The Office of Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services works to ensure the integrity of federal healthcare programs and to safeguard the health and welfare of those programs' beneficiaries. In a session at HIMSS21 on Tuesday, two HHS OIG leaders offered a look at the enforcement priorities the agency has in mind these days, and some hints about the compliance responsibilities healthcare organizations should be prioritizing in the coming months. OIG claims to recover three taxpayer dollars for every dollar it spends, and recoups billions in misspent money every year. Speaking via webcam, Lisa Re, assistant inspector general of legal affairs at OIG, offered an update on some of the legal liabilities and risk areas in the health IT space, related to the False Claims Act, the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. She recounted some of the agency's enforcement actions in recent years, with companies such as athenahealth, CareCloud, eClinicalWorks and Practice Fusion required to pay millions to settle cases. Andrew Vanlandingham, senior counselor for Medicaid Policy and acting health IT lead at OIG, called attention to recent revisions to safe harbors under the Anti-Kickback Statute and Civil Monetary Penalty Rules around coordinated care. He also highlighted a major new priority at OIG: telehealth. "As policymakers, we want to look at what telehealth might look like after the pandemic," said Vanlandingham. "All of those questions are centered around where do they plan on taking this? How will this impact their expenditures for healthcare programs? How to make sure that patients are getting good quality care from telehealth? And I think it's important for us to recognize that we don't know a whole lot right now." He said the OIG is guided by a philosophy summed up in a quote from HHS Principal Deputy Inspector General Christi A. Grimm: "It is important that new policies and technologies with potential to improve care and enhance convenience achieve these goals and are not compromised by fraud, abuse or misuse." When new technologies such as telehealth – with huge upside, but also potential risks – become more commonplace, "it's up to OIG and other healthcare stakeholders to make sure they do live up to that promise and aren't compromised by fraud, abuse or misuse," said Vanlandingham. "And we recognize that a lot of folks in the audience are doing just that: implementing telehealth so it works for patients, for the providers, and is a good tool to enhance care." He said OIG is "working hard to assess how telehealth utilization changed during the pandemic – what that means for corporate integrity, what that means for access, what that means for health equity. We have roughly eight audits and studies ongoing right now that we hope will really be the first down payment for OIG to be part of the broader conversation about what telehealth will look like after the pandemic." The goal is to "help the health technology community and providers as they continue to refine their development of telehealth and enhance virtual care," he said. "This is going to be a whole-of-government and whole-of-industry approach," he added. "It's really up to us to make sure that, since we are at this early stage of implementation of telehealth, that we can avoid issues to make sure that this works as intended, and really ensure that it drives the efficiency and effectiveness and really improves healthcare for all Americans." There have already been some ripe areas for enforcement, said Vanlandingham. "We've had several large-scale national takedown actions involving telefraud schemes with sham or fake telehealth companies," he said. (One of them occurred just this week.) "No one is billing for those telehealth visits fraudulently. They're not submitting a telehealth claim to Medicare. Instead, sophisticated criminal organizations are partnering with telemarketing companies and sometimes unscrupulous doctors to essentially cold call Medicare beneficiaries, get them online with a doctor. And the doctor [asks] a few questions, and then will forge or prescribe expensive equipment that Medicare will pay for durable medical equipment like back braces, or even genetic testing that beneficiaries don't need." DME fraud has been around since Medicare started reimbursing for it, of course. "But for these schemes, what used to be, let's say, $30 or $40 million dollars, maybe $100 million dollars, you've really seen an explosion of exploiting this virtual care model to really bill for a large amount of fraud," said Vanlandingham. "One scheme went for $1.6 billion, with a B, of alleged fraud. So that's obviously very alarming." No one quite knows yet what "telehealth 2.0" will look like, he said. "But I think it is a good example that, as we expand telehealth, there are likely to be instances of large-scale criminal activity that takes advantage of this. And it's up to OIG to assess those risks, and inform policymakers and stakeholders of those risks, and then from those policymakers and stakeholders to adjust." OIG's job now, he said, is to decide "how we can better increase oversight and enforcement to make sure that whatever Congress, CMS and others should decide about how telehealth should be used as providers continue to adopt it, that we've got safeguards to maximize the benefit of telehealth for patients and providers." < Previous News Next News >

Q&A: How retail healthcare, telehealth trends could evolve in 2023 Emily Olsen December 16, 2022 Sanjula Jain, senior vice president of market strategy and chief research officer at Trilliant Health, discusses the future of virtual care and how emerging retail players will affect the industry. As another year shaken by the lingering COVID-19 pandemic ends, stakeholders are still exploring how virtual care trends that accelerated in 2020 will affect the healthcare industry long term. Though telehealth use spiked out of necessity during the early months and remains higher than pre-pandemic levels, utilization has slowed over the past two years. Meanwhile, big retail companies and pharmacies are offering more care options to patients. Sanjula Jain, senior vice president of market strategy and chief research officer at Trilliant Health, sat down with MobiHealthNews to discuss the future of virtual care, how big retail entrants will affect the industry, and the importance of care coordination between traditional health systems and emerging retail players. MobiHealthNews: What are some of your big takeaways from 2022 when you're thinking about telehealth, digital health and other tech-enabled care? Sanjula Jain: A big thing that I'm thinking a lot about is that patients aren't coming back to care, despite all the investments in more supply or access points, whether that be virtual care access points or new retail entrants or traditional urgent care. We've just had this huge mismatch between supply and demand. We're kind of post-vaccines; we have Americans returning to work to some extent. A lot of folks are going into an office a couple of days a week, folks are traveling, yet they're not going back to see their doctors. We've tried to make care more convenient and more accessible. And some of these new supply points are lower cost, and yet, they're still not engaging. I think there are many reasons for that. COVID scared away a lot of patients, and I think we're starting to see signs of more distrust in the healthcare system. And then cost and affordability, with a lot of the price pressures and inflation and recession discussions. That's going to continue to be a factor. There's a lot of health consequences for when patients don't actually engage in necessary healthcare. MHN: What do you think is the future of virtual care when you're looking at 2023 and beyond? Jain: The market for virtual care is a commoditized market. So, we're seeing that generally it's being used amongst a discrete subset of the population. And we have to think about, who are the individuals who like to use virtual care and what are they using it for? Primarily, as a health economist, I think a lot about substitute goods. We are seeing that virtual care is really only a substitute good for behavioral health. It's both a clinical and financial substitute, right? Clinically, having some distance between you and your provider in a behavioral health interaction is probably preferred when you're talking about your feelings and being very vulnerable. And there's no lab work or poking and prodding that actually needs to happen. So it's a viable clinical alternative. Financially, we've been talking a lot about payment parity. Because behavioral health interactions often don't need imaging and lab work, you're kind of making the same amount for an office visit that you are in a virtual care environment. For other use cases like primary care, we see that's not actually the case. The patient goes in for a virtual care visit, and then what really ends up happening is the physician says, "I need you to come in to get some imaging done or get some lab work done." The payment parity, despite the policy incentives to increase telehealth payment rates, it's not true parity. And so, that's why we don't see the full substitute effect. When you boil the ocean down, you see that the market for telehealth continues to be pretty discrete and concentrated to a handful of consumers. That's really where I think the future is, thinking about whether they will continue to use it. The data shows that, in the pandemic, we've seen this tapering. When Americans are given the option for in-person or virtual, they're still preferring to go in-person with that exception of behavioral health. So, I think the market is going to have to be more realistic about the total addressable market size in terms of discrete number of users, the number of visits per user, and then invest accordingly. I think that's a large part of why we've seen a lot of struggling amongst some digital health players, because I think they've overestimated the amount of utilization of virtual care modalities. But the number of discrete users just isn't up to par with what individuals had estimated it to be. MHN: Going back to those retail entrants, Amazon made a ton of news this year. Walgreens, CVS, Walmart — they're also boosting their care delivery operations. How do you think these moves will affect the healthcare industry overall? Jain: It ultimately comes down to, who is your customer or your consumer or patient persona? Who is Amazon actually going after? Who is their target patient population, and for what services? Amazon is really focusing on more low-acuity services, and health systems are particularly good at the higher acuity things like surgeries. What Amazon and other new entrants mean is that they provide the consumer with more care options. But it also creates a need to coordinate care better and create these really strong referral relationships. To go back to my earlier point about patients not coming back, of the patients we do see coming back, we're seeing them really seek out care in these low-acuity, commoditized care settings. They're going in for flu and strep, but they're not getting their screenings. It's going to be really important for groups like Amazon to coordinate with health systems to actually get patients to go follow up for those necessary services and figure out how to refer them out. MHN: How do you think the growth of these retail players will affect patients? Jain: I think it's a bit of a toss up. For some patients, they're going to view it as a better experience, because they can get what they want when they want it. But I think from a clinical perspective, it creates a lot of risks and challenges for the health of the patient. There really isn't someone owning the care or steering the patient through their healthcare journey. Have you gotten this lab workup? Have you gotten this mammogram? For some of these more retail players, it's consumer-directed. You can walk into urgent care and you can go to a telehealth visit, and it's really up to the consumer. But healthcare is complicated, and the average consumer may not have all the necessary information to go make those decisions. I think that there's a lot of positives to retail players in terms of catering to consumer preferences and providing care in a more convenient way. But for a lot of complex care, acute care — that every American is going to need at some point in their life — there is a little bit more fragmentation. MHN: Do you think there's an appetite among health systems to partner with Walgreens or CVS or Amazon and say, "If you see someone, send them to me when they need a cancer screening?" Jain: Absolutely. So, I actually just this week was with one of the health systems, talking to their leadership team. That's very much a conversation that is happening in the boardrooms — what is the right partnership structure with some of these new entrants and primary care providers? I think the challenge is, you could have those great partnerships. But ultimately, it's the consumer and the patient that's still having to make the decision. Are they going to follow up on those recommendations? Where are they going to go next? So, I think it's something that we're going to have to spend more time thinking about as an industry, how to coordinate that care for that patient over time, but with more choice and options in the market. See original article: https://www.mobihealthnews.com/news/qa-how-retail-healthcare-telehealth-trends-could-evolve-2023 < Previous News Next News >