Social Determinants of Health Continue to Limit Access to Care via Telehealth Center for Connected Health Policy April 2021 A study published in JAMA Network Open found that over 27% of visits were conducted virtually in socially advantaged neighborhoods, compared to nearly 20% in disadvantaged areas. While telehealth increased care delivery during COVID-19, social determinants of health continue to limit access and highlight existing disparities related to the digital divide. A study published in JAMA Network Open found that over 27% of visits were conducted virtually in socially advantaged neighborhoods, compared to nearly 20% in disadvantaged areas. Meanwhile 24% of visits in urban areas were virtual compared to 14% in rural areas. The study also found that virtual care occurred more frequently for mental health visits than medical, that higher age and number of chronic diseases also correlated with higher telehealth utilization, and that increased use of telehealth was seen in areas with “COVID-19 hot spots” as well. The researchers stated that they hope these findings guide policymakers when looking to address ensuring access to care for all populations via telehealth moving forward. JAMA Network Study: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2777779 < Previous News Next News >

Closing 2022 with New Telehealth G-Codes for HHAs, Uncertainty for Telehealth Startups, Plus State & Federal Telehealth Developments (and much more!) CCHP December 13, 2022 New G-Code Reporting Requirements for HHAs under CY 2023 CMS PPS Rule The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized new G-codes to report use of telecommunications technology under the home health benefit for Home Health Agencies (HHAs) under their finalized Calendar Year (CY) 2023 Home Health Prospective Payment System (PPS) Rate Update. HHAs are asked to voluntarily start reporting on January 1, 2023, and the requirement to report would kick in July 2023. CMS notes that in 2020 the home health benefit was temporarily altered due to COVID-19 (and made permanent in 2021) requiring any provision of remote patient monitoring or other services furnished via a telecommunications system to be included in the plan of care. The telecommunication service, however is not allowed to substitute for a home visit ordered by the plan of care or for purposes of eligibility or payment. Reporting of the new G-codes will allow CMS to analyze the characteristics of beneficiaries utilizing services remotely and have a broader understanding of the social determinants that affect who benefits most from these services. The codes HHAs will be asked to submit are detailed in a Medicare Learning Network (MLN) document, and include: G0320: Home health services furnished using synchronous telemedicine rendered via a real-time two-way audio and video telecommunications system G0321: Home health services furnished using synchronous telemedicine rendered via telephone or other real-time interactive audio-only telecommunications system G0322: The collection of physiologic data digitally stored and/or transmitted by the patient to the home health agency (for example, remote patient monitoring) For more details on the G-codes and reporting expectations, see the full MLN Guidance and the full text of the finalized CY 2023 Home Health PPS Rate Rule. Falling Investment for Telehealth Startups A recent article in Politico [subscription required] brings to light the stark decrease in investment in telehealth companies in 2022 (compared to 2021), as the pandemic subsides and a recession likely kicks in. In fact, while telehealth funding for digital health in the US peaked in 2021 with $11 billion dollars, that has fallen to only $3 billion by the third quarter of 2022. The effects of this slow down in capital is bound to ripple across the industry. As a result, many startups are laying off workers and focusing on just a few key offerings. Adding to the uncertainty of the future for these companies is how telehealth policies will impact them moving forward as state and federal governments shift from pandemic era temporary policies to often stricter permanent telehealth requirements with greater oversight. Cerebral, a digital mental health company, for example is currently under federal investigation for over-prescribing ADHD medication. This is the type of occurrence other telehealth companies may take note of and may shape the way they think about the future of their products and services in order to avoid such situations. Additionally, consumer demand has shifted post-pandemic. While consumers were enthusiastic about utilizing telehealth for most forms of healthcare in order to avoid crowded doctors’ offices and hospitals at the height of the pandemic, they now prefer to use it for check-ins with their doctors, mental health visits and addiction treatment, according a survey by the American Medical Association. This necessitates a shift for many telehealth start-ups, and according to Megan Zweig, COO of Rock Health, many companies are struggling with this. For more information, read the full Politico article [subscription required]. World Health Organization Telemedicine Implementation Guidance In November the World Health Organization (WHO) released a telemedicine implementation guide based on knowledge and learnings the WHO has gathered since releasing their first report on telemedicine in 2010. The set of recommendations within the new guide is aimed at optimizing the implementation of telemedicine services by providing an overview of key planning, implementation and maintenance processes to inform an investment plan and support countries across different stages in developing telehealth solutions. The guide contains three phases to developing a successful telehealth program, including (1) a situational assessment; (2) planning the implementation; and (3) monitoring and evaluation, and continuous improvement. There are a total of eleven steps within the three phases, including tasks such as performing a landscape analysis, establishing standard operating procedures, developing a budget and determining monitoring and evaluation goals, as well as an adaptive management plan for improvement. Several case studies from different countries, including India, Cabo Verde, Indonesia, Qatar and Mali are also provided in the annex section of the document. Download the full telemedicine implementation document from the WHO’s website for all the detailed steps outlined in their recommended procedures for telemedicine implementation. See full article: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/closing-2022-with-new-telehealth-g-codes-for-hhas-uncertainty-for-telehealth-startups-plus-state-federal-telehealth-developments-and-much-more < Previous News Next News >

Memorial Hermann to provide school-based pediatric telehealth Naomi Diaz October 18, 2022 Houston-based Children's Memorial Hermann has partnered with telehealth company Hazel Health to provide outpatient pediatric care to K-12 students in Houston. Under the partnership, schools that have agreements with Hazel will be able to offer their students access to health services via virtual telehealth sessions, according to an Oct. 17 press release. Children's Memorial Hermann pediatricians or specialists will connect with the students through the program for follow-up or long-term care management. The aim of the partnership is to increase access to pediatric care in schools across 12 counties in southeast Texas. See original article: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/telehealth/memorial-hermann-to-provide-school-based-pediatric-telehealth.html < Previous News Next News >

Telehealth Elements in American Rescue Plan COVID Relief Bill Center for Connected Health Policy April 2021 $50 million in grants for local behavioral health services, including via telehealth, and $140 million for information technology, telehealth and electronic health records at the Indian Health Service. March marked the passage of the third major COVID-9 relief bill (HR 1319), titled the American Rescue Plan. While the bill didn’t include significant changes in telehealth policy as past relief legislation has, it did have some nuggets for telehealth. For example, it establishes an Emergency Rural Development for Rural Healthcare Grant pilot that would, among other things, support telehealth programs. The bill also allots $50 million in grants for local behavioral health services, including via telehealth, and sets aside $140 million for information technology, telehealth and electronic health records at the Indian Health Service. To learn more, see the full text of the bill. American Rescue Plan: https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1319/BILLS-117hr1319enr.pdf Indian Health Services: https://www.ihs.gov/ < Previous News Next News >

Telehealth regulations don't go far enough for some Georgina Gonzalez April 21, 2022 Telehealth protections are fading as pandemic era waivers, which allowed providers to treat patients across state lines, are expiring. Many lobbyists are worried about the future of the industry and believe that the current proposals don't do enough to help secure its future, Politico reported April 20. More than 30 states have signed onto the American Medical Association favored Interstate Medical Licensure Compact, which creates a common application for providers, allowing them to more easily apply for licenses to practice in other states. However, some lobbying groups don't think the compact is enough. "[The compact] streamlines the application process, but it doesn't do a lot to reduce the burdens and costs of maintaining a multistate licensure footprint. That is a source of a lot of frustration for physicians in telemedicine," Nate Lacktman, partner at Foley & Lardner's law firm told Politico. The American Telehealth Association believes states should recognize each other's licenses, but acknowledges that due to the federal nature of the country, more compacts will have to be created to get around the problem. Another advocacy group, the Alliance for Connected Care, has proposed a voluntary national system that would recognize licenses from other states. However, the ATA thinks the federal government could tie federal funding to the proposal to encourage states to sign on. For Full Posting: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/telehealth/telehealth-regulations-don-t-go-far-enough-for-some.html?origin=CIOE&utm_source=CIOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=1372I2146745E8F < Previous News Next News >

State Telehealth Laws and Reimbursement Policies Report, Fall 2022 CCHP October 2022 The Center for Connected Health Policy’s (CCHP) Fall 2022 Summary Report of the state telehealth laws and Medicaid program policies is now available as well as updated information on our online Policy Finder tool. The most current information in the online tool may be exported for each state into a PDF document. The following is a summary of the current status of telehealth policy in the states given these new updates. CCHP provides these bi-annual summary reports in the Spring and Fall each year to provide a snapshot of the progress made in the past six months. CCHP is committed to providing timely policy information that is easy for users to navigate and understand through our Policy Finder. The information for this summary report covers updates in state telehealth policy made between July and early September 2022. Read the executive summary While this Executive Summary provides an overview of findings, it must be stressed that there are nuances in many of the telehealth policies. To fully understand a specific policy and all its intricacies, the full language of it must be read utilizing CCHP’s telehealth Policy Finder. For further information, visit cchpca.org. We hope you find the report useful, and welcome your feedback and questions. You can direct your inquiries to Amy Durbin, Policy Advisor or Christine Calouro, Policy Associate at info@cchpca.org . A special thank you to CCHP Policy Associate Veronica Collins for her invaluable contributions to this report. INTRODUCTION The Center for Connected Health Policy’s (CCHP) Fall 2022 analysis and summary of telehealth policies are based on information contained in its online Policy Finder. The Summary Report provides highlights on certain aspects of telehealth policy and the changes that have taken place between now and the previous edition, Spring 2022. The research for this edition of the Summary was conducted between July and early September 2022. This summary offers the reader an overview of telehealth policy trends throughout the nation. For detailed information by state, see CCHP’s telehealth Policy Finder which breaks down policy for all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Please note that many states continue to keep their temporary telehealth COVID-19 emergency policies siloed from their permanent telehealth policies. These temporary policies are not included in this summary, although they are listed under each state in the online Policy Finder under the COVID-19 category. In instances where the state has made policies permanent, or extended policies for multiple years, CCHP has incorporated those policies into this report. See full report: https://www.cchpca.org/resources/state-telehealth-laws-and-reimbursement-policies-report-fall-2022/ < Previous News Next News >

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Licensure & Telehealth Mei Wa Kwong, JD September 12, 2022 This video addresses the most frequently asked questions CCHP receives regarding licensure and telehealth for example: (1) What does the law says if your patient is going on vacation to another state, but still needs your services? (2) Do you really need a license in another state if you’re just consulting with a provider who is already licensed in that state? (3) ….and many more! View the PPT for this video here. See original video: https://www.cchpca.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions-regarding-licensure-telehealth/ < Previous News Next News >

State Telehealth Laws and Reimbursement Policies Report, Fall 2021 Center for Connected Health Policy October 2021 Today the Center for Connected Health Policy (CCHP) is releasing its bi-annual summary of state telehealth policy changes for Fall 2021. Our semi-annual report has gone digital Historically, our twice-yearly updates to the “State Telehealth Laws and Reimbursement Policies” report have been published as a PDF document, and included the telehealth policies for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Earlier this year, we transitioned exclusively to our new and improved online Policy Finder. This online database allows the CCHP team to easily update each state’s information whenever there is a change, instead of waiting for the spring and fall to roll out the report. Now, you can look up (or download a PDF) of the most up-to-date information on each state from that state’s page. We hope this transition will result in more timely policy information that is easier for you to navigate and understand. Read the Executive Summary We will continue to produce bi-annual summary reports of the status of telehealth policies across the United States to provide a snapshot of the progress made in the past six months. The information for this summary report covers updates in state telehealth policy made between June and September 2021. DOWNLOAD SUMMARY This report is for informational purposes only, and is not intended as a comprehensive statement of the law on this topic, nor to be relied upon as authoritative. Always consult with counsel or appropriate program administrators. Introduction The Center for Connected Health Policy’s (CCHP) Fall 2021 analysis and summary of telehealth policies is based on its online Policy Finder database tool. It highlights the changes that have taken place in state telehealth policy between the initial release of CCHP’s Policy Finder in Spring 2021, and Fall 2021. The research for this Fall 2021 executive summary was conducted between June and September 2021. This summary offers policymakers, health advocates, and other interested health care professionals an overview of telehealth policy trends throughout the nation. For detailed information by state, see CCHP’s telehealth Policy Finder tool which breaks down policy for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Please note that many states continue to keep their temporary telehealth COVID-19 emergency policies siloed from their permanent telehealth policies. These temporary policies are not included in this executive summary, although they are listed under each state in the online Policy Finder under the COVID-19 category. In instances where the state has made policies permanent, or extended policies for multiple years, CCHP has incorporated those policies into this report. DOWNLOAD INFOGRAPH WITH KEY FINDINGS Methodology CCHP examined state law, state administrative codes, and Medicaid provider manuals as the primary resources for the online telehealth policy database tool, from which the findings in this summary are taken. Additionally, other potential sources such as releases from a state’s executive office, Medicaid notices, transmittals or Agency newsletters were also examined for relevant information. In some cases, CCHP directly contacted state Medicaid personnel in order to clarify specific policy issues. Most of the information contained in the database tool specifically focuses on fee-for-service; however, information on managed care plans has also been included if available from the utilized sources. Every effort was made to capture the most recent policy language in each state at the time it was reviewed between the months of June and September 2021. In some cases, after a state was reviewed, they passed a significant piece of legislation. In order to incorporate those significant changes, CCHP conducted a scan for these instances in late September and incorporated language from those enacted bills where appropriate. It should be noted that even if a state has enacted telehealth policies in statute, these policies may not have been incorporated into its Medicaid program. For purposes of this summary, CCHP only counts states as reimbursing for a specific modality or removing a restriction if there is documentation to show that the Medicaid program has implemented a statutory requirement for that policy. Requirements in newly passed legislation will be incorporated into the findings section of future editions of CCHP’s summary report once they are implemented in the Medicaid program, and CCHP has located official documentation confirming this. This survey focused on three primary areas for telehealth policy including Medicaid reimbursement, private payer laws and professional requirements. Within each category, information is organized into various topic and subtopic areas. These topic areas include: Medicaid Reimbursement Definition of the term telemedicine/telehealth Reimbursement for live video Reimbursement for store-and-forward Reimbursement for remote patient monitoring (RPM) Reimbursement for email/phone/fax Consent issues Out-of-state providers Private Payer Laws Definitions Requirements Parity (service and payment) Professional Regulation Definitions Consent Online Prescribing Cross-State Licensing Licensure Compacts Professional Boards Standards Key Findings No two states are alike in how telehealth is defined and regulated. While there are some similarities in language, perhaps indicating states may have utilized existing verbiage from other states, noticeable differences exist. The main areas where changes were made over the past six months fall in the three buckets that CCHP uses to categorize information within its policy finder: Medicaid policy, private payer policy, and regulation of health professionals. Changes were also highly influenced by temporary expansions made during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some states took approaches to extend their pandemic policies multiple years into the future, while others made policies (or portions of their COVID policies) permanent. Still others have not adopted their more lenient COVID policies at all. Connecticut, for example, passed a new temporary law (active until June 30, 2023) which not only requires Medicaid to reimburse for synchronous, asynchronous store-and-forward transfers, remote patient monitoring and audio-only modalities if the provider is in-network, but also places similar requirements on private payers as well. In Medicaid, it was common for states to make slight adjustments to their telehealth policies to add or clarify the services that can be delivered via telehealth, types of professionals that can deliver care through telehealth or the types of settings a patient could be in during a telehealth interaction. For example, Iowa clarified that an intern psychologist can provide telehealth services to Medicaid members. Mississippi clarified federally qualified health centers (FQHC) and rural health clinics (RHC) could be distant site providers, and added the home as an originating site. And, Arkansas now specifies that both the home is an eligible patient site and that group meetings may be performed via telemedicine. Although reimbursement for audio-only telephone has become pretty standard during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE), less than half of state Medicaid programs explicitly are reimbursing for the modality permanently, and many that are have placed restrictive parameters around its reimbursement. It was also common for states to make modifications to their telehealth private payer reimbursement law language to alter the definition of telehealth/ telemedicine. This typically included an expansion of the definition to be broader in scope so that it entails more than just live video, although often with some caveats. For example, Arkansas’ private payer law now stipulates that telemedicine does not include audio-only communication, unless the audio-only communication is real-time, interactive, and substantially meets the requirements for a healthcare service that would otherwise be covered by the health benefit plan. Iowa revised their law to include ‘real-time interactive electronic media’, but still excludes audio-only telephone from the definition of telehealth. Requirements around payment parity were also a common change, with eight states passing a law requiring the reimbursement amount is the same whether a service is provided via telehealth or in-person since Spring 2021. Illinois, for example, now requires reimbursement parity for in-network or tiered network health care professionals or facilities, including services provided via audio-only. Iowa is another example of a state requiring reimbursement of covered services is made on the same basis and same rate as in-person mental health services. Finally, there is a noticeable shift in telehealth policy towards tightening of professional requirements around the use of telehealth by providers. For example, Michigan passed new consent requirements for social work, athletic trainers, massage therapists, acupuncturists and veterinary medicine. Texas is another state that added practice standards (including a consent requirement and prescribing rules) for teledentistry specifically. West Virginia adopted emergency telehealth practice standard regulations to implement a previous law that passed (W. VA Code 30-1-26(b)) for five professions, including dentistry, nursing, osteopathic medicine, social work and medicine. While many states have had these types of standards for several years, the rate at which new telehealth standards are being adopted has increased significantly within the last six months. Additional findings include: Fifty states and Washington DC provide reimbursement for some form of live video in Medicaid fee-for-service. Twenty-two state Medicaid programs reimburse for store-and-forward. However, three states (NC, OH, VT) solely reimburse store-and-forward as a part of CTBS, which is limited to specific codes and reimbursement amounts. Michigan is the only state to add reimbursement for store-and-forward since Spring 2021. Additionally, three jurisdictions (MS, NH, and NJ) have laws requiring Medicaid reimburse for store-and-forward but as of the creation of this edition, don’t have any official Medicaid policy indicating this is occurring. Twenty-nine state Medicaid programs provide reimbursement for RPM. States that added RPM since Spring 2021 included Washington, Michigan and California. As is the case for store-and-forward, three Medicaid programs (NH, HI and NJ) have laws requiring Medicaid reimburse for RPM but at the time this report was written, did not have any official Medicaid policy. Additionally, two of the states (OH and CA) only reimburse the remote physiologic monitoring codes CMS does. Twenty-two states reimburse for audio-only telephone in some capacity (often limitations apply); however, Michigan only reimburses for it when used for provider to- provider electronic consultations. Eleven state Medicaid programs including Arizona, California, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Washington, reimburse for all four modalities, although certain limitations apply. While this Executive Summary provides an overview of findings, it must be stressed that there are nuances in many of the telehealth policies. To fully understand a specific policy and all its intricacies, the full language of it must be read utilizing CCHP’s telehealth Policy Finder. Below are summarized key findings in each category area contained in the Policy Finder as of September 2021. Read more: https://www.cchpca.org/resources/state-telehealth-laws-and-reimbursement-policies-report-fall-2021/ < Previous News Next News >

Telemental Health Collaborative Care Medication Management: Implementation and Outcomes Smita Das, Jane Wang, Shih-Yin Chen, and Connie E. Chen Dec. 22, 2021 Introduction: Access to quality mental health medication management (MM) in the United States is limited, even among those with employment-based health insurance. This implementation, feasibility, and outcome study sought to design and evaluate an evidence-based telemental health MM service using a collaborative care model (CoCM). Abstract Introduction: Access to quality mental health medication management (MM) in the United States is limited, even among those with employment-based health insurance. This implementation, feasibility, and outcome study sought to design and evaluate an evidence-based telemental health MM service using a collaborative care model (CoCM). Materials and Methods: CoCM MM was available to adult employees/dependents through their employer benefits, in addition to therapy. Outcomes included Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) collected at baseline and throughout participation. This analysis was not deemed to be human subjects research by the Western Institutional Review Board. Results: Over 17 months, 212 people enrolled and completed >2 assessments; the enrollees were 58.96% female with average age of 32.00 years (standard deviation [SD] = 7.38). In people with moderate to severe depression or anxiety, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores reduced by an average of 7.27 (SD = 4.80) and 6.71 (SD = 5.18) points after at least 12 ± 4 weeks in the program. At 24 ± 4 weeks, the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 reductions were on average 7.17 (SD = 5.00) and 6.03 (SD = 5.37), respectively. Approximately 65.88% of participants with either baseline depression or anxiety had a response on either the PHQ-9 or GAD-7 at 12 ± 4 weeks and 44.71% of participants experienced remission; at 24 ± 4 weeks, 56.41% had response and 41.03% experienced remission. Conclusions: An evidence-based CoCM telemedicine service within an employee behavioral health benefit is feasible and effective in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms when using measurement-based care. Widespread implementation of a benefit like this could expand access to evidence-based mental health MM. Read more here: https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/tmj.2021.0401 < Previous News Next News >

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its final CY 2022 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) policies for Medicare last week. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Nov. 10, 2021 CY 2022 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) policies for Medicare The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its final CY 2022 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) policies for Medicare last week. Unless otherwise noted, the policies will take effect on January 1, 2022. Much of the proposals published in July 2021 for public commentary remain intact, but CMS did make several modifications and clarifications. https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2021-23972.pdf < Previous News Next News >

Final CY 2023 PHYSICIAN FEE SCHEDULE FACT SHEET CCHP November 1, 2022 On November 1, 2022, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released their final rule for the CY 2023 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS). CMS had previously released their proposed version on July 7, 2022. After receiving submitted feedback from the public during the comment period, CMS published the final version that, unless otherwise stated, will have policies going into effect January 1, 2023. Much of what was proposed in July remains in this final version. End of the Public Health Emergency (PHE) CMS is going forward with the policies required of the Medicare program that were in the 2022 Budget Act. These policies included allowing some of the temporary telehealth COVID policies to continue through a 151-day grace period after the end of the PHE and delaying other permanent policies: • Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), rural health clinics (RHCs), physical therapists, occupational therapists, audiologists and speech-language pathologists remain eligible providers to be reimbursed by Medicare if they provide certain services via telehealth during this grace period. • The patient may be in the home when receiving these services and the geographic limitation would also not apply during the 151 day grace period. • Policies around the provision of mental health via telehealth that were put into law by the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA) passed in December 2020 and administrative policies from the 2022 PFS are also delayed during this 151 day grace period. • The temporary telehealth eligible services COVID-19 list will remain fully available during this 151-day grace period. See full fact sheet: https://www.cchpca.org/2022/11/FINAL-2023-MEDICARE-PHYSICIAN-FEE-SCHEDULE.pdf < 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 >

Citing Medicaid misery, 25 governors push for PHE's end in April Molly Gamble December 21, 2022 In a letter sent to President Joe Biden this week, 25 governors ask for the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency in April. HHS last renewed the federal PHE in October for another increment of 90 days — until January 11 — with the pledge to provide states with 60 days' notice if it decided to terminate the declaration or allow it to expire. Since those 60 days came and went without notice, states are operating under the assumption the PHE will be renewed for another 90 days and expire in April, unless extended again. "We ask that you allow the PHE to expire in April and provide states with much needed certainty well in advance of its expiration," the governors urged Mr. Biden in their Dec. 19 letter. The governors claim the PHE hurts states, largely through the Medicaid flexibilities costing states "hundreds of millions of dollars." Under the continuous coverage requirement of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, state Medicaid agencies are barred from disenrolling people during the PHE — unless they request it — in exchange for an enhanced federal match. HHS estimates up to 15 million people will be disenrolled from Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program when the PHE ends. "While the enhanced federal match provides some assistance to blunt the increasing costs due to higher enrollment numbers in our Medicaid programs, states are required to increase our non-federal match to adequately cover all enrollees and cannot disenroll members from the program unless they do so voluntarily," the governors wrote to Mr. Biden. "Making the situation worse, we know that a considerable number of individuals have returned to employer sponsored coverage or are receiving coverage through the individual market, and yet states still must still account and pay for their Medicaid enrollment in our non-federal share." The governors sent their letter a day before Congress released its omnibus spending bill, which contains working language for states to be able to start evaluating Medicaid enrollees' eligibility as of April 1 in a redetermination process that would take place over at least 12 months. The measure also calls for phasing down the enhanced federal Medicaid funding through December 31, 2023, though states would have to meet certain conditions during that period. The American Hospital Association advocated for the latest extension of the PHE in October, noting that the majority of the hospital members it polled said they still depend on the flexibilities provided by the PHE waivers to deliver care. The letter was initiated by Chris Sununu, governor of New Hampshire, and signed by the following: Kay Ivey, Alabama Mike Dunleavy, Alaska Asa Hutchinson, Arkansas Doug Ducey, Arizona Ron DeSantis, Florida Brian Kemp, Georgia Brad Little, Idaho Eric Holcomb, Indiana Kim Reynolds, Iowa Charlie Baker, Massachusetts Tate Reeves, Mississippi Mike Parson, Missouri Greg Gianforte, Montana Pete Ricketts, Nebraska Doug Burgum, North Dakota Mike DeWine, Ohio Kevin Stitt, Oklahoma Henry McMaster, South Carolina Kristi Noem, South Dakota Bill Lee, Tennessee Greg Abbott, Texas Spencer Cox, Utah Glenn Youngkin, Virginia Mark Gordon, Wyoming See original article: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/citing-medicaid-misery-25-governors-push-for-phes-end-in-april.html?utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter < Previous News Next News >

Celebrating 2021 National Rural Health Day Southwest Telehealth Resource Center Dec. 1, 2021 Since 2010 the National Organization of State Offices of Rural Health has designated the 3rd Thursday in November as National Rural Health Day to celebrate the rural leaders and champions in rural communities. This year the Arizona Telemedicine Program and the SWTRC joined with the Arizona Rural Health Association and the Arizona State Office of Rural Health to kick it off in Arizona with a “2021 Mid-Year Rural Health Policy Roundup” webinar by Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association. Since 2010 the National Organization of State Offices of Rural Health has designated the 3rd Thursday in November as National Rural Health Day to celebrate the rural leaders and champions in rural communities. This year the Arizona Telemedicine Program and the SWTRC joined with the Arizona Rural Health Association and the Arizona State Office of Rural Health to kick it off in Arizona with a “2021 Mid-Year Rural Health Policy Roundup” webinar by Alan Morgan, CEO of the National Rural Health Association. This webinar streamed live to a national audience on November 15th and the recording and presentation slides are available at: https://telemedicine.arizona.edu/webinars/previous for on-demand playback. Each year the National Organization of State Offices of Rural Health selects a Community Star from each of the 50 states. The 2021 Community Star report, https://en.calameo.com/read/0045723395dc12ef8ac48, includes stories of how each Community Star is working to improve life in their rural community. Congratulations to all of the 2021 Community Stars! Matthew Probst, PA-C Chief Quality Officer and Medical Director El Centro Family Health Mathew Probst is the Chief Quality Officer and Medical Director for a Federally Qualified Health Center located Northeast of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Under his leadership, Mr. Probst was able to implement initiatives at the start of the pandemic which resulted in his county having one of the lowest fatality rates and one of the highest vaccination rates in the county. Read more about why Mr. Probst was featured in an award-winning documentary named The Providers: https://en.calameo.com/read/0045723395dc12ef8ac48 < Previous News Next News >

The intersection of remote patient monitoring and AI Bill Siwicki October 25, 2022 Robin Farmanfarmaian, a Silicon Valley AI entrepreneur and author, explains how artificial intelligence can boost the efficacy of RPM and help democratize healthcare. Robin Farmanfarmaian is a Silicon Valley-based entrepreneur working in technology and artificial intelligence. She has been involved with more than 20 early-stage biotech and healthcare startups, including ones working on medical devices and digital health. With more than 180 speaking engagements in 15 countries, she has educated audiences on many aspects of technology intersecting healthcare, including artificial intelligence and the shift in healthcare delivery to the patient's home. She has written four books, including "The Patient as CEO: How Technology Empowers the Healthcare Consumer" and, most recently, "How AI Can Democratize Healthcare: The Rise in Digital Care." Healthcare IT News spoke with Farmanfarmaian to discuss where AI is impacting remote patient monitoring today and how AI can democratize healthcare. Q. Where is remote patient monitoring today? Where do you see RPM five and 10 years from now? A. Remote patient monitoring is still in the first five years of adoption and integration into the healthcare system, and the pandemic accelerated this trend by illustrating the need and value of RPM. There are many clinical-grade devices now that patients can buy or use to measure and monitor various vital signs, including EKG, heart rate, heart rate variability, blood pressure and blood oxygen level. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is one of the organizations that sets the standard of care in the U.S. healthcare system, and CMS launched CPT codes for remote physiological monitoring more than four years ago. CMS has expanded coverage and specificity over the past few years with additional and updated CPT codes. In 2022, CMS launched CPT codes for remote therapeutic monitoring (RTM). These codes cover RTM for respiratory and musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, such as remote physical therapy and COPD inhaler tracking. Considering that most of healthcare happens in a patient's daily life, not the occasional clinic visit, this is a big step forward toward helping patients use their treatments in the best possible way on a daily basis. Many mainstream corporations have launched their own wearables that have cleared the FDA, blurring the lines between healthcare companies and consumer-facing tech companies. Apple, Amazon, Google and Samsung are some of the giants that can shift consumer habits on a national scale, and they all have launched mainstream wearables. For instance, the Apple Watch has outsold the entire Swiss watch industry multiple years in a row, and the device has an EKG monitor that has cleared the FDA for use with people over the age of 22 and with no history of arrhythmia. This trend is great news because many people may already be tracking something about their health, whether that's blood pressure monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring or even a simple accelerometer for step count. That makes it significantly more likely a patient will continue to use the device if their healthcare professional recommends it and has access to the data. In 10 years, remote patient monitoring will be mainstream, and likely reimbursed by all the major payers. We're already seeing that RPM has the ability to catch hospital readmissions days before they happen. The healthcare industry is experiencing a revolution in vital-sign measurement devices, with many companies innovating on ways to collect vital signs. New innovations include taking vital signs using a smartwatch, using just a smartphone or laptop camera, breathalyzer devices for standard vital signs like BP and Sp02, sensors in clothing, epidermal sensors and subcutaneous sensors. Within 10 years, tracking vital signs will be done in ways that are more seamless and effortless for the patient, such as subcutaneous sensors that last five years. Eversense already has an FDA-cleared implantable sensor for continuous glucose monitoring that passively records glucose levels 24/7. Q. How did artificial intelligence first come into the picture with RPM? What was the connection? A. Some of these new FDA-cleared devices measure vital signs continuously, which means they are collecting thousands of data points a day on each patient. BiolntelliSense has a medical-grade rechargeable sensor that sticks to the chest and passively measures more than 20 vital signs, recording 1,440 measurements a day. Humans don't have the ability to analyze and interpret thousands of data points every day for every patient – which is why these clinical-grade wearables and sensors have an AI software component to manage, monitor, analyze and interpret the thousands of daily data points per patient. The AI software typically flags or alerts the healthcare team and patient when the vital signs are outside predetermined ranges, personalized to the individual. While it is still early in this trend, there are examples of new innovations that only exist because of continuous, personalized data collection. January AI uses the previous three days of data from a continuous glucose monitor, combined with vital-sign data, to predict glucose response in real time to individual foods, educating the patient at the point of the decision-making. This helps manage diabetes in a more personalized and predictive way, instead of the standard reactive way diabetes is currently treated. But January AI isn't just for people with diabetes. They work with athletes, people with pre-diabetes or metabolic syndrome, and people who just want to be as healthy as they can be. This education in real time doesn't just assume the standard diet for diabetes is right for every individual or that there is any one healthy diet that works for everyone. People don't react the same way to food as others, or even to themselves. Everyone has a unique glucose response to food based on many factors, including that day's activity level, sleep, amount of fiber, stress, weight, age and many more data points. AI-based software, combined with RPM, allows personalized care 24/7. Q. Today, how does AI work with RPM to improve patient care and outcomes? A. When RPM is used for serious conditions, it can be the difference between life and death. VitalConnect ran a study on their single-lead EKG VitalPatch and was able to predict hospital readmission for cardiac patients 6.5 days in advance. Alacrity Care is working on RPM for oncology that combines vital signs taken with FDA-cleared devices including the Omron blood pressure watch and the Oxitone pulse-oximeter watch with a daily oncology practitioner check-in and blood labs taken in the home. This is to catch serious, life-threatening problems such as neutropenia, sepsis and cytokine storm days before a patient with cancer is in serious medical trouble. Catching these three conditions early can be the difference between life and death. New AI-based software tools are clearing the FDA, including one earlier this year for TytoCare that analyzes lung sounds for the patient and the remote clinician using a connected stethoscope in the home. There are other companies working on sensors in clothing that are covered by Medicare. SirenCare has socks available by prescription that monitor the temperature on the bottom of the foot. For patients with diabetes, a hotspot on the bottom of the foot could lead to a skin ulcer, which could eventually lead to an amputation if the wound doesn't heal. With access to the continuous data, the software can alert the patient and clinician when there is a problem so it can be treated before the skin breaks. The promise and goal of RPM is to keep patients safely in their homes and catch problems early, before they become serious or emergency issues. Q. You have a new book out with Michael Ferro, "How AI Can Democratize Healthcare." How does that theme fit in with the combination of AI and RPM? A. When dealing with AI, life begins at 1 billion data points. There are some major problems with traditional healthcare datasets that exist today to train software. Most healthcare data is locked into silos, whether that is the EHR, faxes, the payer or in clinical notes. In fact, when I get lab results from my physician through the hospital's patient portal, it is uploaded as a scanned fax and saved as a PDF that is not machine readable, and sometimes, not even human readable. While we are seeing interoperability move forward, there is still a long way to go. The typical healthcare data is collected on people at one point in time, such as their annual physical or if they are hospitalized. Frequently, that means the data doesn't include an individual's baseline, taken in their daily environment. It also means that most of the clinical-grade vital-sign data is on people who are already sick enough to be in a hospital. By shifting the data collection to the patient's daily life, RPM has the ability to collect clinical-grade data when people are in all stages of health and at all ages. When collected continuously in machine-readable databases, once RPM is more fully adopted, those databases have the ability to dwarf EHR data from a hospital or health system. That is the type of training data that can give healthcare a much deeper look and understanding of normal vital signs across ages, genders and genetics. RPM helps democratize healthcare in a way never before possible. Many people don't live within easy access to a doctor or clinic. Trying to get to a clinic during their open hours can be next to impossible for some people due to many factors – from not being able to take off work, school, finding transportation, distance, childcare and other barriers, to traveling to a physical clinic. Even for established patients, specialist doctors are frequently booked out one to three months in advance, which gives a medical problem time to advance and potentially get much worse. That, in turn, lowers the odds of a successful outcome when and if that patient is ever seen and treated by a healthcare professional. Instead of trying to physically get to a clinic, RPM can be used to determine when someone needs to see a healthcare professional and can make a virtual care visit much more effective. The best healthcare is the healthcare that actually gets done. RPM enables passive healthcare in someone's daily environment, 24/7. Twitter: @SiwickiHealthIT Email the writer: bsiwicki@himss.org Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication. See original article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/intersection-remote-patient-monitoring-and-ai?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=womeninhit < Previous News Next News >

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 >

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 >

Telehealth, physical therapy and the pandemic: Lessons for all Bill Siwicki February 14, 2022 A University of Washington clinical instructor explains the benefits and challenges of therapy and technology. For vulnerable patient populations – and for those who just prefer the convenience of care at home – telemedicine has been a success. But it still has its limitations. For example, the precise movements and exercises involved in physical therapy rehab are hard for a patient to accomplish remotely. A provider on a video call may seem about as valuable as a YouTube video. But there are new technologies and strategies that link patients, safely, to at-home physical therapy care that balances telemedicine with in-person visits. Many experts say this is the future of telemedicine: a hybrid of in-person and virtual care. To read the entire article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/telehealth-physical-therapy-and-pandemic-lessons-all < Previous News Next News >

Geisinger's journey to greatly expanded telehealth Bill Siwicki April 19, 2022 The prolific health system is now able to offer telemedicine appointments to patients for primary care, urgent care and more than 70 specialties. More than 8% of total outpatient visits now are conducted virtually. Rural Pennsylvania is bigger than the states of New Jersey, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont combined. Some 75%, or 33,394 square miles, of Pennsylvania are considered rural. The geography is diverse, from rugged mountainous terrain to large stretches of farmland. High-profile health system Geisinger and its affiliated entities serve 45 predominantly rural counties throughout central and northeastern Pennsylvania, 31 of which are a part of Appalachia, a unique region of the Appalachian Mountains that cuts through the western part of the state. THE PROBLEM "Access to specialty care for many of our communities is scarce; these communities already are faced with primary care shortages, and for those who need to seek specialists and sub-specialists, long travels often are a costly and time-consuming reality," said Tejal A. Raichura, director of the center for telehealth at Geisinger. "Surveys show that rural Pennsylvanians are not taking care of themselves as well as their urban counterparts," she continued. "Fewer rural residents than their urban counterparts get the recommended exercise. Rural residents have higher rates of obesity, with almost two-thirds at risk for chronic diseases based on their sedentary lifestyle." Rural residents are in poorer physical condition, have more health risks and are more likely to lack health insurance, she added. The wage gap between urban and rural Pennsylvanians is getting wider. In fact, it has doubled in the last 30 years. Improving the quality of healthcare while lowering costs and increasing access in rural Pennsylvania counties is challenging, she said. "In 2018, Geisinger leadership committed to expanding our telehealth program and invested in a platform that could cover various elements of virtual care, including video visits to the home and our clinics, tele-stroke visits at our various inpatient units and emergency rooms, and video visits to non-Geisinger organizations, including other hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, correctional facilities, et cetera," Raichura recalled. PROPOSAL The business plan requested support for an expanded telemedicine program, one that would connect distantly located expert physicians trained in several specialties – including neurology, stroke/intensive care, pediatrics, primary care, geriatrics, psychiatry, endocrinology, rheumatology, podiatry and several others – with rural and underserved communities, allowing residents to access specialty care where they live and work. For Full Article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/geisingers-journey-greatly-expanded-telehealth < Previous News Next News >

Telehealth heavy hitter Dr. Roy Schoenberg on virtual care in 2023 Bill Siwicki December 14, 2022 The Amwell CEO reviews his successful predictions from last year and looks ahead at clinician-initiated telemedicine and virtual care shifting from transactional to transformational. From the distant past of the 1990s up to just a few years ago, many healthcare technologists have predicted that telemedicine would make it into the mainstream of healthcare delivery. Well, today, thanks to many factors surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has finally made it into the mainstream. And now that it is being so robustly used across the country, the big question is: What's next? We spoke with a heavy hitter in the world of telehealth, Dr. Roy Schoenberg, president and CEO of Amwell, one of the big players in telemedicine technology and services, to get his views on how his predictions from last year turned out and where virtual care is headed in 2023. Q. You predicted last year that in 2022 we'd see exciting advancements in remote patient monitoring and automation powered by the patients who need them most. How did that prediction turn out? A. Not only has the technology for remote patient monitoring and care automation become more advanced, but the use cases they are powering are maturing rapidly. Today, we're seeing applications of automation that go beyond mimicking clinicians and instead are being used to help patients manage the reality they face in the moments in between visits when they are not in front of clinicians. It's this area that I predict will grow more rapidly in the years ahead as it means that technology can actually assist clinicians in being there for their patients more frequently in a cost-effective way. As the industry struggles to keep up with workforce shortages and deal with financial constraints, technology that can serve clinicians and patients, while being financially viable, will become pervasive. Still, we've only just begun to scratch the surface of what RPM and automated care programs can do to drive more patient-centric, value-driven care. We can transform lives and quality of life by extending the reach of clinicians through digital technology and empowering people to live their healthiest life. Q. You also predicted that in 2022 patients will be interacting with healthcare both physically and through technology – hybrid care. How did that turn out? A. 2022 was a year of advancing the understanding that digital care is much more than videoconferencing. People now are coming to terms with the fact digital care is not just about changing where care happens but how care happens. By thinking about it as a true distribution arm, you can see how you can manage patient conditions differently, you can reach customers differently, you can motivate patients to play a more active role in their healthcare – this is a powerful reimagination of traditional care models. Hybrid care models that combine physical and virtual interactions was the first iteration of seeing this understanding play out; and we saw these models accelerate significantly. The next phase is hybrid care models that combine physical, virtual and automated interactions. It's this type of digital care delivery that we are focused on enabling our clients to achieve through an integrated platform approach that allows for a well-coordinated, seamless care experience across all settings. Q. What are two predictions you have for 2023 on technological advances in telemedicine? A. In 2023, we'll continue to see digital health's influence in completely reimagining how care is accessed and delivered. It's a transformation that will be sparked not just by consumer demand for digital care, but also by clinician preference. In fact, clinician-initiated digital care will far outpace patient-initiated virtual interactions going forward, with clinicians becoming the top utilization driver. It's a trend we've already started to see. We've reached a point where physicians and nurses are prescribing virtual care. Within physician practices, medical assistants are triaging patients for virtual encounters when the manner in which they are seen – in person or virtually – is less important than the need for speedy access to care. In an era when patients are surrounded by devices, we'll not only gain greater knowledge of potential use cases for RPM and automated care, but also a wealth of data around which approaches work best in specific circumstances. These findings will further advance digital care from a "nice to have," convenient feature to an integral aspect of the continuum of care. Additionally, I predict digital care will continue to shift from transactional to transformational. Virtual primary care is becoming ubiquitous, however the opportunity for virtual primary care is dramatically extended when it's tightly integrated with escalation paths to create a more comprehensive care experience. Discussions around digital care's trajectory will increasingly examine how to more tightly integrate virtual care and digital health within the complete patient journey. It will be a time of reinvigoration around the power of what is still a relatively new component of care. Some of our best learnings around digital health will take place in this space where the immediate pressures of COVID-19 have passed, and clinicians feel more free to imagine: "What's next?" Q. What's a prediction you have for 2023 regarding telemedicine public policy? A. One of the biggest challenges for the digital care industry continues to be around state licensure. It's clear we need to allow healthcare to be distributed around the country through technology – the internet does not stop at state lines. What's less clear, however, is who on Capitol Hill will be the one to say, "We have to find another way." Change must occur in partnership with medical boards that will continue to play an important role in enabling the safe practice of medicine. It's inevitable this will be the biggest war we'll see play out over the next few years and it will greatly impact the future of care distribution. Follow Bill's HIT coverage on LinkedIn: Bill Siwicki Email the writer: bsiwicki@himss.org Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication. See original article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/telehealth-heavy-hitter-dr-roy-schoenberg-virtual-care-2023 < Previous News Next News >