Prescribing via Telehealth Post-Pandemic Center for Connected Health Policy July 2021 Another result of telehealth policies being in flux is uncertainty around the long-term landscape in terms of prescribing controlled substances post-pandemic. Another result of telehealth policies being in flux is uncertainty around the long-term landscape in terms of prescribing controlled substances post-pandemic. Existing federal law, mainly the Ryan Haight Online Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 2008, restricts the prescribing of controlled substances via telemedicine except in very specific and limiting circumstances. Given these federal restrictions, this may be a telehealth policy barrier states have trouble tackling completely on their own. There is a potential pathway for the prescribing of certain controlled substances without an in-person exam post-PHE, which is if the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) creates the telemedicine special registry they were mandated to establish rules for by October 2019 but never did. Thus, the specific medications and the criteria to qualify for the registry is yet to be seen. In the first official mention of the long awaited regulations since December 2019, last month the DEA said in response to comments on a recently proposed (yet unrelated) rule about narcotics: “Although these comments regarding telemedicine special registration are beyond the scope of this rule, DEA understands commenters' frustration with the delay. DEA intends to promulgate regulations for the telemedicine special registration in the near future.” In addition, a few of the current federal bills CCHP is tracking that would alter the Ryan Haight Act include: * S. 445/HR 1384 – Makes exceptions for narcotic drugs in schedules II, IV, or V for community health aides or community health practitioners prescribing to an individual for treatment or detoxification * S. 340 – Allows for a telehealth evaluation for schedule III or IV drugs under certain circumstance * S 1457 – Similar language to S. 340 is in Sec. 205 of bill. CCHP will continue to track this issue and provide updates as they occur. Existing federal laws around prescribing can be found on CCHP’s website through both the policy finder tool and the pending federal legislation page at https://www.cchpca.org/federal/pending-legislation/. < 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 >

Congress' last-minute $1.7 trillion omnibus package: 8 healthcare takeaways Molly Gamble December 20, 2022 Lawmakers rolled out a roughly $1.7 trillion year-end spending bill Dec. 20 to fund the U.S. government through most of 2023, tacking on proposals to extend telehealth and hospital-at-home flexibilities while leaving out other healthcare asks. Lawmakers have until the end of Dec. 23 to clear the 2023 Omnibus Appropriations bill or federal funds are set to run out, bringing key agencies and programs to a halt. The package consists of all 12 annual appropriations bills Congress must pass and would fund the government through the remainder of fiscal 2023, which runs through September. Eight healthcare- and hospital-specific notes out of the 4,155-page bill: 1. The legislation curbs a scheduled cut of nearly 4.5 percent to the Medicare physician fee schedule that was set to take effect in 2023, narrowing the cut to 2 percentage points in the year ahead with a scheduled cut of 3.25 percentage points in 2024. The American Medical Association, which lobbied against the cuts, said it is "extremely disappointed and dismayed" with the cuts that made it to the bill. 2. While physicians did not get the relief they sought with complete aversion of fee schedule payment cuts, the spending bill would avert the 4 percent Statutory Pay-As-You-Go reduction, which would have amounted to cuts of approximately $36 billion, from taking effect in 2023. 3. The legislation extends incentives under the alternative payment model, which were set to expire this year, but reduces the amount from 5 percent to 3.5 percent. The incentive is designed to offset losses in revenue physicians may incur as they move from fee-for-service to participation in value-based care models. 4. The package extends Medicare telehealth flexibilities through 2024. The deadline for these flexibilities has been tied to 151 days after the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency, meaning the precise date was unclear as HHS has continued to renew the PHE in 90-day increments. Under the legislation, providers would be able to lean on flexibilities guaranteed throughout 2024. 5. The package extends acute hospital care at home waivers and flexibilities for two years through 2024. Similar to telehealth flexibilities, the deadline for hospital care at home waivers was tied to the status of the PHE. CMS has approved more than 250 hospitals to participate in the acute hospital care at home program. 6. The legislation extends the low-volume hospital payment adjustment and Medicare-dependent hospital programs through fiscal year 2024, or Sept. 30, 2024. 7. The legislation includes $118.7 billion — a 22 percent increase — for VA medical care. Other healthcare end medical allotments include $47.5 billion for the National Institutes of Health (a 5.6 percent increase); $9.2 billion for the CDC; $1.5 billion for NIH's second-year Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health and $950 million for the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, according to Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy. 8. The American Hospital Association expressed satisfaction with a number of measures in the legislation, including the extension of telehealth, hospital-at-home and programs to help rural hospitals, but signaled toward the work that remains to garner funding for hospitals. "In the new year, we will continue to advocate for Congress and the administration to take action to address patient discharge backlogs, support our current workforce and increase the pipeline into the future, hold commercial health insurers accountable for policies that compromise patient safety and add burden to care providers, and strengthen hospitals that care for a disproportionate number of patients covered by government programs or are uninsured, to name a few of our priorities," association President and CEO Rick Pollack said in a statement shared with Becker's. See original article: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/congress-last-minute-1-7-trillion-omnibus-package-8-healthcare-takeaways.html < Previous News Next News >

GAO Reports on Telehealth and COVID-19 Flexibility Findings Center for Connected Health Policy June 2021 While the GAO reported telehealth flexibilities as critical to reducing obstacles of care, they also stressed considering its potential to increase program expenditures and stated that the quality of telehealth services has still not been fully analyzed. The United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) released testimony May 19th regarding their ongoing assessment of COVID-19 flexibilities within the Medicare and Medicaid programs, as required under federal pandemic response oversight provisions included the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. Provided before the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, the GAO focused its summarized findings around the effects of program flexibilities and preliminary observations related to telehealth waivers of certain federal requirements, as well as considerations regarding ongoing use. Telehealth waivers included allowing services to be provided remotely in all areas and settings, as well as expanding the types of providers and technologies that could be used, such as audio-only modalities. While the GAO reported telehealth flexibilities as critical to reducing obstacles of care, they also stressed considering its potential to increase program expenditures and stated that the quality of telehealth services has still not been fully analyzed. GAO testimony highlighted Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) data on recent telehealth utilization: -Medicare telehealth services increased from 325,000 services in mid-March to 1.9 million in late-April; then decreased to 1.3 million by June as it continued to steadily drop -Nearly 40% of beneficiaries received office visits through telehealth; nearly 60% received mental health services via telehealth -Internists and family practitioners were the primary provider specialties using telehealth, through which they delivered one-quarter of their services -89 of the 146 newly available types of telehealth services could be furnished via landline phones -More beneficiaries under age 65 received services via telehealth than those over age 65 -More beneficiaries in urban areas received services via telehealth than those in rural areas -Similar proportions of beneficiaries across all racial and ethnic groups received services via telehealth When highlighting potential considerations moving forward, the GAO added that preliminary observations show that due to lack of broadband and digital literacy, access to services via live video telehealth continues to be limited among those with low socioeconomic status, those over age 85, and those in communities of color. Given that CMS information indicated that telehealth services have continued as in-person visits have been able to increase, the GAO also suggested considering the potential for increased spending if payment parity requirements related to telehealth are maintained post-pandemic. In relation to fraud and program integrity, the GAO discussed the inability of CMS to determine many aspects of telehealth services, such as type of modality and specific location data, as well as the suspension of security rules that raise potential medical information privacy issues. In regard to quality of care via telehealth considerations, the GAO cited a study specific to Direct-to-Consumer telehealth companies potentially overprescribing antibiotics as their primary example, adding that CMS is still exploring how to measure quality related to services provided via telehealth. GAO information was based upon interviews of federal and state officials and provider and patient groups regarding their telehealth experiences, in addition to reviews of federal laws and CMS guidance. Additional GAO data and reports can be found on their website. < Previous News Next News >

CB Insights Report: Global Telehealth Investment is Still on The Rise Kat Jercich, Healthcare IT News August 2021 Researchers found a 169% year-over-year increase in global telehealth investment, with the top five deals alone worth $1.5 billion. A new report from CB Insights found that global telehealth investment rose for the fourth consecutive quarter in Q2 of 2021 – with teletherapy deals representing a substantial share. The State Of Telehealth report found that much of the growth was pushed by accelerating digital transformation initiatives, as well as patient experience prioritization. At the same time, stakeholders and thought leaders voiced concerns about health inequity, and lobbyists mounted the pressure for long-term regulatory reform. WHY IT MATTERS The telehealth train has continued to chug along, despite dire warnings from health advocates about what might happen if the public health emergency expires without any action from Congress. Indeed, the CB Insights report was optimistic from a financial perspective: It found that global telehealth investment grew 17% quarter-over-quarter compared to Q1 of 2021, and 169% year-over-year, to reach a record high of $5 billion across 163 deals. As far as segments go, telemedicine providers, platforms and marketplaces saw their first decline in six quarters, with mergers and acquisitions at a record high. Meanwhile, teletherapy – especially with regard to mental health and chronic diseases – was an investor hotspot, and virtual care enablement companies saw a funding high. Remote monitoring and diagnostics companies raised $841 million across 33 deals, with decentralized lab tests and vital sign monitors flagged as notable business development areas. And telepharmacy had a strong funding quarter, particularly when it came to direct-to-consumer brands. The report also found that telehealth visits appear to be stabilizing at levels above those pre-pandemic, although they are still below the rates seen in March and April 2020. THE LARGER TREND Retail giants in the United States appear to be betting big on telehealth, even amidst looming uncertainty about its regulatory future. Walmart Health and Amazon Care have both signaled their plans to expand virtual care throughout the country, while established telemedicine vendor Amwell announced two acquisitions this week. But it's not all rosy: Amwell competitor Teladoc reported a $133 million net loss this past quarter. ON THE RECORD "While all telehealth segments saw acquisitions during the quarter, the two biggest hot spots were virtual/digital care enablement and telemedicine providers, platforms and marketplaces," observed CB Insights researchers. < Previous News Next News >

New HHS-OIG Reports on Telehealth Challenges and Oversight in State Medicaid Programs Center for Connected Health Policy September 2021 Last week the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) released two new telehealth reports, both related to the use of telehealth to deliver behavioral health services to Medicaid beneficiaries. HHS-OIG breaks up their study into two reports. Last week the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) released two new telehealth reports, both related to the use of telehealth to deliver behavioral health services to Medicaid beneficiaries. HHS-OIG breaks up their study into two reports: *States Reported Multiple Challenges with Using Telehealth to Provide Behavioral Health Services to Medicaid Enrollees (Challenges Report) which focuses on state care delivery issues, and *Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Evaluation and Oversight of Telehealth for Behavioral Health in Medicaid (Evaluation Report), which looks closer at state data collection and evaluation efforts. The reports are both based on surveys HHS-OIG conducted with Medicaid directors from 37 states as well as various stakeholders in early 2020. The surveys were particularly focused around telemental health delivery through managed care organizations, however most stakeholders focused on general telehealth issues in their responses. While the information was gathered pre-pandemic, HHS-OIG applies the findings to support understanding and recommendations to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) around post-pandemic telehealth policy. Key Challenges: Lack of Telehealth Training and Limited Broadband In terms of challenges related to care delivery via telehealth, the number one issue reported by 32 out of 37 surveyed states, was a lack of provider and enrollee training. In HHS-OIG’s interviews, stakeholders described not only provider issues related to use of telehealth technology, but also lack of education around telehealth coverage and reimbursement policies. Lack of internet access came in as the second highest challenge, reported by 31 out of 37 states. Broadband issues raised included not only enrollees having insufficient broadband speeds, but some clinics in rural areas having no broadband access at all. Other challenges provided by state Medicaid programs included: -Concerns around how providers protect patient privacy and personal information. -Lack of interoperability between provider electronic health record systems and how to increase provider sharing of patient information. -The high costs of telehealth infrastructure, such as initial equipment costs as well as maintenance and repair costs. -A lack of licensure reciprocity across states. -A lack of understanding around telehealth consent policies. Citing how CMS has given states broad flexibility in how they structure their telehealth policies, the recommendations from the report to CMS focus on increasing creation and dissemination of additional informational and educational resources, such as best practices amongst states, funding options related to broadband and interoperability, and creating a state plan amendment template that could additionally assist states in covering some ancillary infrastructure costs. Evaluation: Telehealth Data and Oversight Within the Evaluation Report which focused more on data collection and analysis, HHS-OIG found that only 3 out of 37 states are unable to track which services are provided via telehealth, however only 2 out of 37 states have evaluated that data specific to impacts on access to behavioral health services and only one state has evaluated telehealth impacts on cost. The report notes that though other states didn’t directly evaluate telehealth data however, they did provide information on observational telehealth impacts based on their experiences with telehealth. For instance, 17 out of 37 states reported that telehealth increases access to providers and a few states also noted potential cost savings, while 6 out of 37 said the impact of telehealth on cost is largely uncertain. The final focus of the Evaluation report was related to telehealth quality assessments and oversight by Medicaid agencies. While 10 out of 37 states noted concerns around quality, one state mentioned quality as more of a clinical practice issue, and two states believed provider training could address such concerns. In regard to oversight, only 11 states were said to conduct monitoring specific to telehealth, while other states noted they oversee all services the same. HHS-OIG made much stronger and more specific recommendations when it comes to state oversight and evaluation, suggesting the need for additional telehealth specific measures by CMS, states, and managed care organizations. Looking Ahead The HHS-OIG reports highlight many of the broad issues and questions related to telehealth that have become forefront in policymakers’ minds over the past year and half, such as challenges around addressing the digital divide and how to best evaluate telehealth impacts. The recommendations point toward a few different potential post-pandemic pathways for CMS mainly around increasing education and oversight. As we’ve seen confusion grow around what state Medicaid agencies believe CMS allows them to do as permanent telehealth policy, such as around federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), perhaps the most essential recommendation made by HHS-OIG comes back to increasing coordination amongst state Medicaid agencies with CMS. The reports’ limited scope to behavioral health services through managed care organizations is also notable in terms of policy application even though state and stakeholder responses may have been more general. For instance, many states and policymakers seem to be focused around Medicaid fee-for-service policies more so than managed care, as well as reimbursement challenges, such as payment parity and similar fee schedule considerations. In addition, the HHS-OIG study did not break down any differences or feedback by telehealth modality, while many states and stakeholders have been focused on the future of audio-only availability – especially as a way to address the challenge of limited broadband access. In terms of evaluating data, while many states may have not had a data evaluation plan in place at the time of HHS-OIG survey, many now do as a result of recently enacted legislation predicated on the surge of use and attention to telehealth during the pandemic. Therefore, it may be interesting for HHS-OIG to consider conducting a similar more broad survey in a year or two after states have had more time to collect and wrap their heads around the data. Challenges Report: https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/OEI-02-19-00400.pdf Evaluation Report: https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/OEI-02-19-00401.pdf < Previous News Next News >

Teladoc Reports $133M Net Loss in Second Quarter, but Visit Numbers Are Up Kat Jercich, Healthcare IT News July 2021 Meanwhile, Amwell announces its acquisition of SilverCloud Health and Conversa Health. The virtual care giant Teladoc released its earnings report this week, showing a net loss of $133.8 million for the second quarter of 2021. Total net loss for the first half of 2021 was $333.5 million, compared to $55.3 million for the same time period last year. At the same time, the vendor said its $503 million second-quarter revenue earnings had more than doubled compared with 2020. This change led Teladoc to forecast its total yearly revenue to be in the range of $2 billion to $2.025 billion, with a predicted net loss between $3.35 and $3.60 per share. Its visit numbers were also up, at 3.5 million: 28% higher than the second quarter of 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic. The company expected 13.5 million and 14 million total visits this year. After the earnings report, Teladoc's shares fell more than 7% in the extended session Tuesday, as reported by MarketWatch. Still, execs voiced optimism, driven in part by the launch of myStrengthComplete and what the company described as a "significant new agreement" with the Health Care Service Corporation. "Teladoc Health delivered a strong second quarter, marked by exciting new client wins, product launches, and tremendous progress on our quest to be the category-defining provider of whole person virtual care," said CEO Jason Gorevic in a statement. "We have solid momentum heading into the second half as the market embraces the unified care experience that only Teladoc Health has the breadth and scale to achieve," he added. New Amwell acquisitions Teladoc competitor Amwell was also in the news this week for its $320 million acquisition of SilverCloud Health and Conversa Health. SilverCloud Health delivers a range of digital cognitive behavioral health programs, which the company says are evidence-based and clinically validated. According to SilverCloud, the programs are used by more than 300 organizations, including Kaiser-Permanente, Optum and Providence Health. Amwell will use the platform to enrich its own behavioral health offerings and develop new programs. Conversa Health, meanwhile, uses automated patient interactions to ensure patients stay on track before and after live or virtual visits. It is used, the company says, by organizations including Northwell Health, UCSF Health, UNC Health, University Hospitals and Prisma Health. Amwell says it will use Conversa's technology to advance initiatives aimed at longitudinal care, clinical quality and population health. The acquisitions will also enable Amwell to create new digital workflows and programs and expand its client base to include those of Conversa and SilverCloud – especially in the U.K. "We believe that future care delivery will inevitably blend in-person, virtual and digital care experiences; and as such, we are uniquely building a global platform to support such advanced, coordinated care," said Ido Schoenberg, chairman and co-CEO at Amwell. "By integrating SilverCloud Health and Conversa Health into our platform, we are demonstrating Amwell’s fundamental and repeatable design to continually scale digital healthcare services across the different sites of care," he added. "These acquisitions will amplify the presence and reach of care teams and reaffirm that as the needs of the healthcare marketplace evolve so too will the Amwell platform." < Previous News Next News >

HHS to maintain COVID-19 public health emergency past January Jakob Emerson November 11, 2022 The U.S. will extend the COVID-19 public health emergency past January 11, 2023, CNBC reported Nov. 11. A 12th extension of the PHE since the first in January 2020 is also likely because of a lack of public statement from HHS warning about a termination. The agency last renewed the PHE Oct. 13 for an additional 90 days to Jan. 11, 2023 — it also told states it would provide a notice 60 days before if it did decide to end it, or Nov. 11. The PHE allows the country to continue operating under pandemic-era policies, which led to a complete overhaul of telehealth and who can use it, fast-tracked approvals of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments, and preserved healthcare coverage for millions of Medicaid beneficiaries nationwide. Eleven states also still have coinciding public health emergency orders in place. As of now, Medicare telehealth flexibilities will end 151 days after the PHE expires. In July, the House passed The Advancing Telehealth Beyond COVID-19 Act, but the legislation must still be approved by the Senate for Medicare patients to continue using telehealth through 2024. "It's not that we necessarily want to continue the PHE for a long period of time," Nancy Foster, AHA's vice president of quality and patient safety, told Becker's in October. "What has not yet happened is fully thinking through how to unwind some of the [telehealth] flexibilities we currently have, and how to perhaps make permanent some of the others." In addition, the end of the PHE will trigger a Medicaid redetermination process that will cause a major disenrollment of beneficiaries. Over the course of about a year, HHS estimates up to 15 million people could lose health coverage. Payers are prepping for the redetermination period, as they expect to lose Medicaid members and hope to switch some to ACA coverage. With the Inflation Reduction Act's extension of ACA premium tax credits through the end of 2025, the nation's largest insurers have all recently announced plans to majorly expand exchange offerings in 2023, including UnitedHealthcare, Elevance, Aetna, Cigna and Centene. The extension of the federal emergency past January may have been unexpected for insurers, as UnitedHealth Group executives told investors Oct. 14 they thought the PHE would end in January. "Our tailwinds will be weighed against one known headwind, and that is the membership attrition and related impacts on our Medicaid business as eligibility redeterminations are conducted over the course of the next year," Elevance Health's CFO John Gallina told investors Oct. 19. The extension also comes amid uncertainty around public health as winter looms. New Omicron strains — dubbed "escape variants" for their immune evasiveness — have become the dominant strains in the U.S., accounting for 40 percent of all cases in the week ending Nov. 12. Daily cases in the country are expected to grow 39 percent from Nov. 3-17. Hospital admissions trends are expected to remain stable or be more uncertain, with 1,300 to 7,300 new admissions likely reported on Nov. 25, according to the CDC. As of Nov. 4, the nation's seven-day average of new hospital admissions was 3,273. See original article: https://www.beckerspayer.com/policy-updates/hhs-to-extend-covid-19-public-health-emergency-through-april.html < 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 >

Telehealth May Help Reduce Medicine's Carbon Footprint Kat Jercich, Healthcare IT News July 2021 A wide-ranging study recently found that an increase in telehealth over the past six years corresponded with a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions due to transportation. A large-scale study recently published in The Journal of Climate Change and Health found that an increase in telehealth use in the Pacific Northwest corresponded to a dramatic decrease in transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. The study – a collaboration among researchers from Northwest Permanente, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School – examined six years of outpatient care at Kaiser Permanente Northwest, which serves more than 600,000 people in Oregon and Washington. "Prior to the pandemic, despite rising total visit volume, transportation-associated emissions were already declining due to a greater proportion of telehealth visits," observed the researchers. WHY IT MATTERS As the study notes, the healthcare sector is a "significant source" of greenhouse gas emissions. From 2010 to 2018, emissions from the U.S. healthcare industry increased by 6 percent. Although many of those emissions arise directly from facilities or indirectly from the supply chain, researchers note that patient transportation to clinics also plays a role in healthcare's carbon footprint. "To date, there are no large-scale studies of emissions reductions due to telehealth across an entire ambulatory system of a regional healthcare system in the United States, nor any studies showing the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare-associated [greenhouse gas] emissions as a result of rapid telehealth adoption," they explained. Team members looked back at the total number of in-person and telehealth visits from 2015 through 2020. They calculated the average distance between patients' home addresses and their assigned primary care clinics, and used Oregon Department of Transportation data about how individuals run errands to estimate what percentage of in-person trips were taken by car. They also assumed that telehealth visits replaced in-person visits on a 1:1 ratio (which may not be true, as other studies about downstream care have shown). Overall, in-person outpatient visits had increased at 1.5% per year through 2019 – but declined by 46.2% in 2020. Meanwhile, telehealth visits – which had already been increasing – jumped in 2020 by 108.5%. Researchers calculated that greenhouse gas emissions from patient travel due to transportation for primary care, specialty care and mental health visits fell from 19,659 tons CO2-eq in 2019 to 10,537 tons CO2-eq in 2020. "This reduction is primarily due to increased use of telehealth services as opposed to a decline in total annual visits during the pandemic and is evidenced by the total number of visits in 2020 being greater than prior years that had much larger total emissions," said researchers. "Nor is this reduction attributable to changes in fuel efficiency or transportation mode share over time, which are likely minimal on this time scale and were not modeled in this analysis," they added. The researchers argue that reductions in transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions "greatly eclipse" smaller increases associated with the use of computer equipment. The study has limitations: In addition to the 1:1 assumption mentioned above, researchers also pointed out that some visits would not have been conducted at a primary care clinic. In addition, they acknowledge that the Oregon DOT estimates may not represent medical appointment visits accurately. Still, "our study likely underestimates emissions reductions as we did not account for decreased commuting by healthcare providers conducting telehealth visits from home," the researchers wrote. "Furthermore, the environmental benefit of telehealth may not be limited to reductions in transportation-associated emissions if increased virtual care permits healthcare systems to care for more patients without increasing outpatient clinic space," they added. THE LARGER TREND Given the effect of climate change on the environment – and, in turn, on wellness, particularly for already vulnerable communities – many healthcare experts have called for action, with some noting the role that digital tools can play. In addition to preventative measures such as those outlined in the study, digital health tools may also help in the shorter term with regard to the consequences of climate change. When a winter storm tore through the southern United States earlier this year, for example, clinicians were able to keep seeing patients from their own homes. "If there are natural disasters, which we're seeing more and more of, because of global warming, we're hoping we'll be able to continue to provide care [via telehealth] through more weather events – like the freeze, like the hurricanes, and things of that nature," said William Kiefer, CEO of Chambers Health, a community-based system in Texas, in March. ON THE RECORD "If the U.S. healthcare system were to maintain or expand upon current levels of telehealth utilization, additional reductions in [greenhouse gas] emissions would potentially be achieved through impacts on practice design," said researchers in the new study. "Ambulatory visit carbon intensity would be an effective way to measure these changes." < Previous News Next News >

Telemedicine & Telehealth: For Allied Health Professionals, Too Faith Lane April 20, 2022 With more and more people using telehealth applications since the pandemic, one education expert asked how to expand training to include Physical Therapists and Occupational Therapists According to a recent study, one in five adults polled about health care during the coronavirus pandemic said that they or someone in their household delayed receiving medical care or were unable to get care, due to office closures or shutdowns. Although the pollsters focused questions about doctor or dental appointments, providers across the board experienced disruption in their specialty areas, including Peggy Stein, OTD, OTR/L, CHT, an Occupational Therapist in Oregon. Occupational therapy, or OT, focuses on how people perform activities that are most important to their daily lives, so for people who need it, missing out affects quality of life, according to Stein. “OT is important to assess the ability of people to participate in usual activities. Work is important and many people equate occupation with work. However, life involves more than work. Participating in life includes taking care of ourselves, our family and friends, pets, home, yard, or attending to community. These are all ‘occupations’,” Stein said. “The state did halt therapy for a few weeks, and many providers had upheaval for several months,” she said. And while Stein eventually returned to her practice, the buzz surrounding providing telehealth continued in the medical and therapeutic communities. “Back in March 2020, we hosted a webinar. We had numerous occupational therapists, physical therapists (PTs) and speech language pathologists (SLPs) in attendance; more than we have previously seen attending our telemedicine training programs,” said Melanie Esher-Blair, MAdm, Distance Education & Event Coordinator for the Southwest Telehealth Resource Center (SWTRC) and the Arizona Telemedicine Program (ATP). “They wanted more information on how to put the ‘tele’ into their scope of practice to maintain continuity of care for their clients,” said Esher-Blair. She said she knew the SWTRC and the ATP had the experts for developing a program. Both OT and PT national associations have information regarding how telehealth fits into the scope of practice, so attendees of the March webinar agreed creating a training around telehealth was important. An interdisciplinary team worked together to come up with the Occupational and Physical Therapy Webinar Series. For full post and access to video: https://southwesttrc.org/blog/2022/telemedicine-telehealth-allied-health-professionals-too < 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 >

UCHealth slashes code blues up to 70% with telehealth technologies Bill Siwicki December 20, 2022 The academic medical center uses tele-sitter and virtual ICU platforms for a program it calls Virtual Deterioration. UCHealth is a non-profit healthcare organization based in Colorado made up of 12 hospitals across the state. THE PROBLEM The organization had a new use case for virtual care, a program called Virtual Deterioration. Essentially, it was trying to find patients who were deteriorating in the hospital sooner in order to provide rescue and treatment faster to give them the best outcome. "What we were seeing prior to this program was a lot of variability as we tried to detect deterioration, and then once we were detecting it, reaching out to the bedside caregivers as to what happened next," said Dr. Diana Breyer, chief medical officer of the Northern Region at UCHealth. "And so, this was very much a part of our plan to decrease that variability for patients that were staying in place for us to be able to monitor them consistently with more frequent vital signs to make sure we really had rescued them and utilized technology to keep an extra set of eyes on them," she added. PROPOSAL UCHealth already had implemented vendor AvaSure's TeleSitter platform for patient safety and the vendor's Verify for virtual ICU. It expanded use of these technologies to Virtual Deterioration. Prior to implementing the technology, the process for virtual deterioration involved staff in a remote clinical command center working in tandem with frontline staff. "And we did try a process before we employed the technology, where it was a lot of secure chat through our EHR, similar to texting, in addition to a lot of phone calls and not really being able to visualize our patients," said Amy Hassell, RN, senior director for the Virtual Health Center at UCHealth. "This approach created a lot of friction and interruption to the bedside staff who were trying to do hands-on tasks with the patient," she continued. "So we decided to bring in an audio-visual connection. We have mobile carts, and some of our hospitals have cameras in the ceiling so we can just turn on that camera when a deterioration event is occurring." With the camera in the room, physicians and nurses in the command center now can see and interact with the patient as well as the care team. "They're able to see what's occurring so that it's just like we're in the room with that care team member," Hassell explained. "When we do this, it helps us cut down on phone calls and interruptions at the bedside, allowing us to still participate and do our part of the program. "The program provides support and makes sure milestones of care are being met throughout that deterioration event, and help triage if needed," she continued. Because it's a clinical command center that operates a lot of equipment and different platforms, staff have a weekly operational meeting with the IT team that supports the area. "They were part of our planning phases; further, we did our own IT technical dress rehearsals ahead of implementation with the clinical folks each time we went live," Hassell explained. "IT is in lockstep with us and have been very helpful to getting this deployed by helping support us, navigate us through the bumps, as we push the envelope. They're great partners to us and have been since the very beginning." MARKETPLACE There are many vendors of telemedicine technology and services on the health IT market today. Healthcare IT News published a special report highlighting many of these vendors with detailed descriptions of their products. Click here to read the special report. MEETING THE CHALLENGE Today, the Virtual Deterioration technology is a separate platform. There's going to be context-aware linking soon, and that will help because then staff can go right in from the patient's chart through that portal. Clinicians at the bedside use this technology. Nursing staff and physician staff are the ones pulling the monitoring equipment into the room and using it at the bedside. On the reciprocal end, it's the remote clinical command staff who are accessing that camera to participate with the team and interact with them. UCHealth is in the midst of developing a new role called the "patient technology technician." "The patient technology technician is a staff member who brings the mobile device into the room so that nurses and physicians don't have to be responsible for setting it up, and they can remain focused on the patient," Hassell said. "That's been successful. We're really trying to get all of our folks operating at the top of their license. "This role will be very helpful as we continue to scale it, so the nursing staff aren't the ones having to bring monitoring equipment to that rapid response," she added. RESULTS When UCHealth started looking at this project, it looked for deterioration in particular, such as what are the metrics being sought. One of them that is well-established in the literature is around decreasing code events in the acute care setting, Breyer noted. "Those patients ideally are brought to the ICU and if they're going to code, code there, or if they're rescued," she said. "So we have seen improvement throughout the work that we've been doing around deterioration in this space both in the northern and southern region of UCHealth where we've implemented the solution. "And that's probably our biggest metric that we're able to measure," she continued. "I'll add that in the space of deterioration, it is sometimes difficult to measure what you're doing because you're trying to show that you're now doing something that you were previously not doing. And measuring that omission can be a challenge." The other thing staff are measuring as a process metric is for those patients who stay in place and are not being moved to a higher level of care at the time of their rapid response event. "We are measuring a consistent post-RRT intervention that we previously did not have," Breyer said. "That's another area that we're monitoring. Ultimately, we would like to see this improve mortality, but that's more of a lagging indicator, and that one is a little more variable in the literature as to how much they affect these deterioration events." Hassell stresses the organization is going to have to continue to trend this and the lagging indicator of mortality within the patient population being touched. "But we have early data where we've seen our rapid response rates increase anywhere from 26% up to about an 86% increase, depending on what location you're looking at as we've done this across our system," she reported. "And then, in early data again, we've seen our code blue events in our acute care areas go down by 25% to 70%. "We've seen our code blue events drop, which helps us know we're going in the right direction, we're detecting deterioration earlier, thus reducing a bad outcome from a code blue," she continued. To Breyer's point, UCHealth has seen the post-monitoring period, because it's leaving that camera in place for six hours and virtual staff are helping oversee and watch that patient in conjunction with the frontline staff who are very busy. "And so we've seen an increase in post-rapid response vitals anywhere from a 39% increase up to 152% increase of vitals being ordered, and then working on getting them completed," Hassell explained. "It's been a large range that we've seen, but a lot of intentionality because resources are tied up in that rapid response call. "Once the patient is stabilized, and they're staying on the floor, the nurses then go see other patients that they've not seen for a while," she continued. "And so we've got to make sure that we're taking time to watch over the patient in that kind of fragile window when they still could continue to deteriorate and need a higher level of care. That's where we put a lot of focus and energy, and those are some of our early metrics." ADVICE FOR OTHERS The piece Hassell likes about the technology currently in use is that staff have been able to flex it for a different use case that's been highly valuable. "We're still working on making it an improved platform with the company, but I also think that it's been instrumental and opened up pathways for us that we wouldn't have previously had," she noted. "We weren't seeing the success that we're seeing now until we introduced the camera piece because it solved those issues we mentioned. "And so if you are considering any sort of hybrid approach from, for example, a clinical command center or nursing workflows, you want to have a great platform that you feel your staff can use and interact with seamlessly and with ease," she advised. From a technology standpoint, having it be easy and seamless for the bedside team is key, Breyer said. "While there are now great technology solutions to some of these problems, the heavy lift is the change management with your bedside team, the non-technology piece," she concluded. "And so that's where a lot of the energy for a successful project must be." 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/uchealth-slashes-code-blues-70-telehealth-technologies?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=womeninhit < Previous News Next News >

Telehealth Remains Key Modality for Behavioral Healthcare Delivery eVista December 19, 2022 A Michigan-based provider leveraged a telehealth solution to expand critical access to behavioral healthcare as demand for these services skyrocketed during the COVID-19 pandemic. After reaching new heights during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth use is leveling off in several clinical care areas. But there is one prominent exception: behavioral healthcare. Healthcare stakeholders are continuing to flock to telehealth for behavioral health services. An analysis of data from January 2020 to March 2022 shows that mental health conditions were the most common telehealth diagnoses at the national level. In addition, data shows that amid a drop in overall telehealth use since 2020, telemental healthcare has grown. In the first quarter of 2019, 32.4 percent of all telehealth visits were related to behavioral healthcare, according to a market research report. That figure jumped to 59.9 percent by Q1 2022. This data, along with the ongoing mental health crisis in America, signifies the importance of providing virtual care options for behavioral healthcare. At Michigan-based Easterseals MORC, telehealth has been integral to behavioral healthcare delivery since 2019. Then, amid the pandemic, the organization saw its virtual visit volumes skyrocket, and they continue to show no signs of slowing down. "We went from 25 telehealth users before the pandemic to 300," says Clarissa Hulleza, Chief Information Officer of Easterseals MORC. "Those numbers are still going up. We're not seeing any decrease." WHY THE ORGANIZATION IMPLEMENTED TELEHEALTH Easterseals MORC, an affiliate of the national Easterseals organization, serves over 21,000 individuals annually. It provides a wide array of behavioral health services, including therapy, psychiatric care, and substance abuse treatment, as well as long-term care for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In 2019, the organization decided to implement a telehealth solution. One of the key goals of the move was to expand access to behavioral healthcare across the state. “The reason we pursued a telehealth solution was so that people who couldn't get to us regularly or at all, could be provided the opportunity to still receive care," says Hulleza. "We serve all of Michigan, and not all of Michigan has access to transportation, or maybe their closest local provider is 20 miles away. So, it was really creating more opportunities for access." Additionally, telemedicine was already becoming popular as a mode of physical healthcare delivery, prompting behavioral healthcare providers to catch up. "It was one of those, 'well, why aren't we doing the same?'" Hulleza says. Easterseals MORC partnered with eVisit to launch a telehealth pilot program in May 2019. A little under a year later, the COVID-19 pandemic hit, compelling providers across the country to rapidly scale up their telehealth programs. According to Hulleza, already having a telehealth solution and vendor partnership in place enabled Easterseals MORC to expand virtual care use seamlessly. "I would say that the absolute benefit was that we never had to close our doors," she adds. "In a time that people needed behavioral healthcare the most, we were able to provide it." IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES AND KEY LESSONS LEARNED Easterseals MORC leverages telehealth for nearly all of its services, including case management, one-on-one and group therapy. The organization even provided Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy virtually, which aims to improve social behaviors using interventions. But implementing a telehealth solution for behavioral healthcare has its challenges. For Easterseals MORC, those challenges ranged from clinician training to technology issues among those receiving services. Clinicians were not only providing care in a new way, they also had to become tech support in helping those they served navigate the new technology. Training is a critical aspect of telehealth technology implementation. If training is not provided proactively, it can result in clinicians avoiding virtual care use as they might find it difficult and overwhelming. “Pilot testing the solution before a full rollout was critical to ensuring that clinicians had adequate training to use the technology and that workflows were not negatively impacted,” Hulleza says. Partnering with the right vendor was a vital aspect of this effort, as the vendor was able to provide clinician training resources as well as suggest new policies and processes required to promote and support the telehealth program. “Ultimately, we selected our vendor because we were looking for a partnership that would improve the overall behavioral healthcare delivery experience. This meant that we needed a tool that offered more than a two-way video solution — one that integrated with, and empowered, the clinical workflow with value-added technology,” Hulleza shares. “There were multiple tools in the marketplace that solved the video connection challenge, but Easterseals MORC was looking to do more than simply move the clinical interaction to a video screen.” Further, choosing the right partner and then piloting the telehealth solution allowed the organization to test the supporting technology infrastructure before a full rollout. Easterseals MORC tested laptop specifications and made sure the solution worked equally well on different devices, including mobile phones and tablets. "We even went as far as making sure our bandwidth at all of our locations was increased so that if we had 20 people doing telehealth at the same time, there wouldn't be any degradation in services," Hulleza says. On the side of those receiving services, Easterseals MORC had to consider the digital divide facing its population. "[The people we serve] don't always have the newest phones, the best bandwidth," she says. "They don't have the luxury of going to a bedroom and closing the door. They might have shared living arrangements. We had to make sure we were accommodating all of those things." To address individuals' technology access needs, the organization applied for various grants and used those to provide iPads and iPhones with built-in data plans. Another essential aspect of closing the digital divide is identifying the viability of an individual to receive services via telehealth. Easterseals MORC uses a checklist tool provided by the telehealth vendor to identify these individuals and the barriers they face. "Do you have a private place? Do you have a microphone? What model phone do you have or mobile device?" Hulleza adds. "The tool goes through all of these questions and allows providers to evaluate if telehealth is an option." Easterseals MORC plans to solidify telehealth as a key behavioral health delivery mechanism within its business. It is unclear if Congress will make the temporary telehealth flexibilities enacted during the pandemic permanent — but for Hulleza, there is no going back. "I absolutely want to grow telehealth here," she says. "The need amplified because of the pandemic, but telehealth was going to exist for our organization even if the pandemic didn’t happen." ____________________________ About eVisit eVisit is an enterprise virtual care delivery platform built for health systems and hospitals. It delivers innovative virtual experiences in care navigation, care delivery, and care engagement, improving margins at scale without sacrificing quality or patient and provider satisfaction. eVisit works seamlessly across enterprise service lines and departments to improve outcomes, reduce costs, and boost revenue. Based in Phoenix, Ariz., eVisit helps healthcare organizations innovate and succeed in today’s changing healthcare market. See original article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/telehealth-remains-key-modality-for-behavioral-healthcare-delivery < Previous News Next News >

Increased Access to Care Via Telehealth in CHCs: NACHC Survey on Audio-Only Telehealth and Health Centers Center for Connected Health Policy July 2021 The concern from CHCs about possibly losing the ability to utilize telehealth was significant, with over 90% of respondents saying that without the extension of existing flexibilities it will be difficult to reach vulnerable populations, and over 80% stating that it will lead to worse outcomes for patients with behavioral health needs. Temporary telehealth policies during the pandemic, particularly those related to audio-only, highlighted the capacity of community health centers (CHCs) to increase patient access to care in underserved communities. The National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) recently released a report on their survey of CHCs to assess their telehealth experiences over the course of the public health emergency and determine what the effects would be upon termination of temporary policies, and how that would impact their providers and patients. The concern from CHCs about possibly losing the ability to utilize telehealth was significant, with over 90% of respondents saying that without the extension of existing flexibilities it will be difficult to reach vulnerable populations, and over 80% stating that it will lead to worse outcomes for patients with behavioral health needs. Overall, the report suggested that losing audio-only coverage would likely exacerbate existing health disparities. Prior to the pandemic, health centers faced numerous federal restrictions that limited their ability to use telehealth. According to the report, previously only around 40% had used telehealth and audio-only modalities. Once allowed during the pandemic, however, nearly all CHCs utilized telehealth and delivered critical health care services to 30 million patients. Urban health centers and those serving low-income populations were also found to have higher rates of providing services via telehealth and audio-only, and 92% of health centers said audio-only improved patient access to care. To continue to provide this expanded access to care post-pandemic via telehealth the report discussed the need for Congressional action to permanently remove restrictions around use of audio-only and originating/distant site limitations, as well as ensuring reimbursement parity. In addition, as many states struggle to determine their post-pandemic policies related to telehealth, it has become apparent that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) must also clarify whether states can continue to allow audio-only coverage under Medicaid and still receive federal matching funds. The value and necessity of audio-only was stressed throughout the survey. Benefits of audio-only telehealth included: *Reduced no-show rates *Improved patient/provider relationships *Better coordination of care amongst providers and families *Improved chronic care management The report concludes that without continued telehealth coverage for CHCs, all of the stated benefits will disappear, create a barrier to the provision of quality health care, and negate the ability for health centers to bring equity and access to underserved communities that would otherwise likely go without needed services. The authors urge the federal government to act and preserve access to care via telehealth in health centers across the country. Currently, there is active legislation federally and in many states that seeks to expand and extend telehealth and audio-only policies, including those for health centers. The fate of these bills remains unknown, but it is clear that the ideal resolution would need both federal direction and state engagement. A small but limited step was taken with CMS’s newly proposed physician fee schedule (PFS) for 2022. CMS is proposing to expand the definition of a “mental health visit” for CHCs by including mental health services provided through “interactive, real-time telecommunications technology”, including audio-only if the patient is not capable or does not consent to the use of live video. Additionally, the rate paid for eligible services would be at parity. This proposal is still rather narrow, but many of the existing restrictions, as mentioned previously, live in federal statute and must first be addressed by Congress. < Previous News Next News >

Can virtual nursing help ease clinician burnout? Bill Siwicki November 14, 2022 The turnover rate for nurses stands at 27%. Can telemedicine save the day? No hospital or health system is immune from the challenges of the nationwide nursing shortage. As organizations look for ways to reduce the administrative burden on nurses and improve engagement and satisfaction, virtual nursing is one consideration. Many tasks performed by nurses in the inpatient setting are repetitive – a virtual nursing unit allows nurses to manage these tasks remotely. Bedside nurses and staff then are freed up to focus on patient-facing care, while those in the virtual unit can monitor patients, enter data in the medical record and more. To better understand the ins and outs of virtual nursing, we interviewed Dr. Shayan Vyas, senior vice president and medical director for hospitals and health systems at Teladoc Health. Q. What is the national nursing shortage like today? How does it play out in hospitals and health systems? A. Every health system I've spoken with, that we work with, says workforce challenges are among the top three issues keeping them up at night. This is particularly true for nursing staff. In 2021, nurses were leaving the profession at an alarming rate. According to NSI Nursing Solutions, the turnover rate for nurses increased by 8.4% in 2021 and currently stands at 27%. An increase in patient volume and occupancy rates, among other factors, have led to severe emotional and physical exhaustion and, ultimately, job dissatisfaction and burnout. A 2021 McKinsey survey found that 32% of nurses were likely to leave their current position due to insufficient staffing levels, a lack of support and the emotional toll of the job. President Obama once said that "nurses are the heartbeat of the United States healthcare system," and I really believe that to be true. They put their lives on the line to serve and care for others every single day, and we need to give them the tools to more effectively, efficiently and safely care for others and save lives. Virtual care offers new strategies to address these challenges; virtual nursing is an important component that health systems can include in their transformation and care delivery redesign initiatives. Q. What is virtual nursing, and how does it work? A. Virtual nursing, simply put, is the delivery of nursing care and services from a remote location. Virtual nurses are responsible for monitoring multiple patients while collaborating with the nurses, physicians, therapists and other staff who provide care at the patient's bedside. The virtual nursing unit can be centralized (for example, nurses work from a command center in a healthcare facility), distributed (nurses work from home or other remote locations) or hybrid. Adopting virtual nursing provides a way to mitigate potential staffing losses due to short-term injury or other conditions that require nurses to be off their feet. It is also a way to extend nurses' careers, for example, by offering nurses with developing or chronic physical limitations the option of working seated in a command center, instead of providing physically challenging care on a nursing unit. Virtual nursing programs also can help attract nurses by providing different options for shifts and work styles. This model supports organizations by enabling them to have virtual nurses work from anywhere – allowing them to provide much-needed care and services without requiring nurses to relocate so that they live close enough to a hospital to be able to go on-site for their shift. It also helps new nurses with clinical support, medication verifications and overall non-physical patient bedside care assistance. Health systems that have created virtual nursing programs to augment their bedside nurses have found virtual nursing can extend nurses' careers and improve job satisfaction for floor nurses by taking away responsibility for many tasks that do not require physical touch. This allows the bedside nurse to focus on hands-on patient care and contributes to higher patient satisfaction because of the responsiveness and additional attentiveness it enables. Virtual nursing can also allow advanced nurse practitioners like PAs and ARNPs the ability to connect virtually with a virtual intensivist, and the virtual nurse can help with many of the nonphysical contact needs of patient care. Q. How can virtual nursing reduce the administrative burden on nurses and improve engagement and satisfaction? A. While hands-on care will always be needed, many duties can be fulfilled virtually, including coordinating procedures, getting sign-offs from multiple care team members, reconciling medications, providing patient education, answering questions, initiating the discharge process and more. In many successful virtual nursing programs, administrative tasks like discharge paperwork, medication reconciliation, etc., have been shifted from bedside to virtual nurses. Virtual nursing systems enable virtual nurses to monitor patients and communicate with them, their families, and other visitors and care team members in real time, including responding to patient nurse calls. The goal is to provide a new level of support to patients, nurses and the bedside team. Several health systems with virtual nursing programs have reported high job satisfaction for their virtual nurses. Nurses say the virtual role enables them to spend more time with patients overall. The extra time, and the complementary nature of virtual and bedside nursing roles, contributes to improved job satisfaction for both bedside and virtual nurses, and positive experiences for patients. Q. Please talk a bit about one of your hospital clients using virtual nursing and the results they've achieved. A. Overall, the benefits of virtual nursing include staffing flexibility, potential retention and recruitment advantages, the ability to leverage staff resources, and favorable nurse and patient satisfaction. Another major benefit of virtual nursing is a reduced length of stay, resulting in improved throughput, as well as time saved in the discharge process. Some lesser-known benefits of virtual nursing are a differentiated and improved patient experience, with potential associated improvements to patient satisfaction and HCAHPS and NPS scores. Patients also are seeing a significant improvement in satisfaction as they no longer have to pull a bedside staff member to help answer questions or assist with administrative documentation. Our client, Saint Luke's Health System in Kansas City, Missouri, has helped address the nursing shortage by having virtual nurses support bedside nurses. The virtual nurses can assist with non-hands-on care, education, documentation, admission, discharge, answering questions, and reviewing the care plan or physician rounding with the patient and their loved ones, among other tasks. The unit has enhanced Saint Luke's bedside care response rates, increased patient and nurse satisfaction, reduced the burden on bedside nurses, and positively impacted quality and safety for a better work environment. Patients are discharged within two hours of the discharge order, some 20% faster than in other units, and they're also out of the hospital before noon at a 44% faster rate. This has, in turn, reduced the wait time for patients in the ED and reduces the time to treatment. What's more, these benefits have boosted nurse morale, improving workforce engagement, reducing fatigue, even improving Saint Luke's recruitment capabilities. We need to provide nurses, our frontline workers, with technology that improves their work, quality of life, and the level and effectiveness of bedside care. Twitter: @SiwickiHealthIT Email the writer: bsiwicki@himss.org Healthcare IT News is a HIMSS Media publication. See original article: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/can-virtual-nursing-help-ease-clinician-burnout < Previous News Next News >

Mental Health vs. Primary Care: How Americans Are Using Telehealth Robin Gelburd, J.D. April 19. 2022 Social workers and psychiatrists are among the providers Americans are frequently visiting via telehealth, highlighting the pandemic’s continued mental health impact. Ever since the COVID-19 pandemic began, many Americans have been receiving health care via telehealth. The question arises: Who are the health care professionals on the other end of all these video links and phone calls? According to new evidence from private insurance claims data, the top specialty providing telehealth services nationally this past January was social worker. Because the most common telehealth service social workers provide is psychotherapy, this is just one sign of how prevalent the provision of mental health services through telehealth has been, as our country continues to grapple with the pandemic and its impact on many fronts. Tracking Telehealth Month by Month FAIR Health has been tracking telehealth trends on a monthly basis since January 2020 with the Monthly Telehealth Regional Tracker. Drawing on our repository of billions of private health care claims, the Telehealth Tracker documented the rapid rise in telehealth usage in the early months of the pandemic and has followed the evolution of telehealth since then. The Telehealth Tracker is a free, interactive, online map of the four U.S. census regions (Midwest, Northeast, South and West) that allows the user to view an infographic on telehealth for a specific month in the nation as a whole or in individual regions. The Telehealth Tracker itself evolved as the pandemic continued. In the first year, to study the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on telehealth, each month in the pandemic year of 2020 was compared to the corresponding month in the pre-pandemic year of 2019. In 2021, the focus turned to month-over-month rather than year-over-year changes. In 2022, we’ve added new features: the top five telehealth provider specialties rendering telehealth services and the Telehealth Cost Corner, which presents a specific telehealth procedure code and its median costs. Continuing from previous years are the percent change in telehealth’s share of medical claim lines, the top five telehealth procedure codes and the top five telehealth diagnoses. (A claim line is an individual service or procedure listed on an insurance claim.) Provider Specialties In January 2022, social worker was the provider specialty rendering the most telehealth services nationally and in every region but the West. In the West, primary care physician was the leading provider specialty, ahead of social worker by just a tenth of a percentage point in terms of each specialty’s share of telehealth claim lines. In every other region and nationally, primary care physician was in second place behind social worker. Nationally, psychiatrist, psychologist and primary care nonphysician were in third, fourth and fifth place, respectively. Though the regions varied in the order of provider specialty, in all of them – as in the nation as a whole – three of the five top specialties were related to mental health: social worker, psychiatrist and psychologist. The share of telehealth services provided by social workers varied by region. Nationally, social workers accounted for 28.7% of telehealth claim lines. In the Midwest, where their share was greatest, they accounted for 32.2%; in the West, where it was least, they made up 22.4%. Diagnoses Throughout 2021 and into January 2022, mental health conditions constituted the top telehealth diagnostic category nationally and in every region. In January, mental health conditions accounted for 58.9% of telehealth claim lines nationally – up from 55% in December 2021. By comparison, mental health conditions also were No. 1 among telehealth diagnoses in 2020, but accounted for only 44% of telehealth claim lines nationally. Throughout 2021, generalized anxiety disorder was the top telehealth mental health diagnosis nationally and in most regions, though major depressive disorder was No. 1 in the West. From May to July 2021, and again from September to October, substance use disorders emerged as one of the top five telehealth diagnoses nationally. Procedure Codes Throughout 2021, the telehealth procedure code used most often nationally was the code designating one hour of psychotherapy. This remained the nation’s top telehealth procedure code in January 2022, when it accounted for 23.1% of telehealth claim lines. The nation’s top five codes contained two other psychotherapy codes that month: one in fourth place designating 45 minutes of psychotherapy and another in fifth place marking a 30-minute psychotherapy visit with evaluation and management. In three of the four census regions, all three of these codes were in the top five, with one hour of psychotherapy in first place. In the South, however, the top five telehealth codes contained one hour of psychotherapy in first place and 45 minutes of psychotherapy in fifth place, but did not include the code for a 30-minute visit. Services Besides Mental Health Despite the dominant position of mental health services, telehealth also offers a gateway to services and treatments for many other conditions. In January, along with mental health conditions, the top five telehealth diagnostic categories nationally also included acute respiratory diseases and infections, COVID-19, developmental disorders and joint/soft tissue diseases and issues. The Telehealth Cost Corner was created to spotlight the costs of a different telehealth procedure code each month. For January, the spotlight was on the code designating treatment for a speech, language, voice, communication and/or hearing processing disorder. This code is most commonly used by speech-language pathologists to help correct specific speech or language disorders – typically in young children with developmental language delays and/or autism, though sometimes also in older adults after stroke or other debilitating incidents. Provider Specialties In January 2022, social worker was the provider specialty rendering the most telehealth services nationally and in every region but the West. In the West, primary care physician was the leading provider specialty, ahead of social worker by just a tenth of a percentage point in terms of each specialty’s share of telehealth claim lines. In every other region and nationally, primary care physician was in second place behind social worker. Nationally, psychiatrist, psychologist and primary care nonphysician were in third, fourth and fifth place, respectively. Though the regions varied in the order of provider specialty, in all of them – as in the nation as a whole – three of the five top specialties were related to mental health: social worker, psychiatrist and psychologist. The share of telehealth services provided by social workers varied by region. Nationally, social workers accounted for 28.7% of telehealth claim lines. In the Midwest, where their share was greatest, they accounted for 32.2%; in the West, where it was least, they made up 22.4%. Diagnoses Throughout 2021 and into January 2022, mental health conditions constituted the top telehealth diagnostic category nationally and in every region. In January, mental health conditions accounted for 58.9% of telehealth claim lines nationally – up from 55% in December 2021. By comparison, mental health conditions also were No. 1 among telehealth diagnoses in 2020, but accounted for only 44% of telehealth claim lines nationally. Throughout 2021, generalized anxiety disorder was the top telehealth mental health diagnosis nationally and in most regions, though major depressive disorder was No. 1 in the West. From May to July 2021, and again from September to October, substance use disorders emerged as one of the top five telehealth diagnoses nationally. Procedure Codes Throughout 2021, the telehealth procedure code used most often nationally was the code designating one hour of psychotherapy. This remained the nation’s top telehealth procedure code in January 2022, when it accounted for 23.1% of telehealth claim lines. The nation’s top five codes contained two other psychotherapy codes that month: one in fourth place designating 45 minutes of psychotherapy and another in fifth place marking a 30-minute psychotherapy visit with evaluation and management. In three of the four census regions, all three of these codes were in the top five, with one hour of psychotherapy in first place. In the South, however, the top five telehealth codes contained one hour of psychotherapy in first place and 45 minutes of psychotherapy in fifth place, but did not include the code for a 30-minute visit. Services Besides Mental Health Despite the dominant position of mental health services, telehealth also offers a gateway to services and treatments for many other conditions. In January, along with mental health conditions, the top five telehealth diagnostic categories nationally also included acute respiratory diseases and infections, COVID-19, developmental disorders and joint/soft tissue diseases and issues. The Telehealth Cost Corner was created to spotlight the costs of a different telehealth procedure code each month. For January, the spotlight was on the code designating treatment for a speech, language, voice, communication and/or hearing processing disorder. This code is most commonly used by speech-language pathologists to help correct specific speech or language disorders – typically in young children with developmental language delays and/or autism, though sometimes also in older adults after stroke or other debilitating incidents. < Previous News Next News >

CMS-Supported Telehealth Will Continue To Be A Driving Force – But Watch for Greater OIG Enforcement The National Law Review March 3, 2022 As mindsets pivoted to a post-pandemic life, telehealth advocates petitioned CMS to embrace telehealth as a permanent care option, and CMS responded with regulatory action at the end of 2021. During the Covid-19 Pandemic, telehealth usage surged as patients and providers turned to it as a safer care alternative. McKinsey estimated telehealth claim volumes reached 80 times pre-pandemic levels at its peak, ultimately stabilizing at 38 times pre-pandemic levels by early 2021.1 This increase was mostly driven by CMS’ waivers and relaxation of regulatory constraints for telehealth reimbursement. But, the temporary nature of both left questions regarding telehealth’s future. In December 2021, CMS issued new regulations which, collectively, steer telehealth toward becoming a part of the telebehavioral health toolkit accepted by Medicare post-pandemic. In the CY2021 Physician Fee Schedule Final Rule2 , further discussed here, CMS broadly expanded access to telebehavioral health services. Specifically, Medicare permanently authorized payment for telehealth services furnished “for purposes of diagnosis, evaluation or treatment of a mental health disorder” under the following relaxed criteria:3. Read full article here: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/cms-supported-telehealth-will-continue-to-be-driving-force-watch-greater-oig < Previous News Next News >

Commentary: Rethinking the Impact of Audio-Only Visits on Health Equity by Lori Uscher-Pines and Lucy Schulson December 17, 2021 New pandemic-era flexibility that allowed audio-only health visits to be routinely reimbursed as telehealth may be leading to substandard care for those it was meant to serve. Prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, audio-only visits were rarely included in definitions of telehealth and seldom reimbursed. As clinicians were granted numerous flexibilities to deliver various care modalities at the onset of the pandemic, telephone calls were elevated to the status of reimbursable audio-only visits. Although audio-only visits were used across the health care system, federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) that provide primary care and behavioral health services to millions of Medicaid and uninsured patients were particularly likely to deliver audio-only visits in the spring of 2020. They were also more likely to rely on them as the pandemic progressed (PDF) because of patient and clinic barriers to video telehealth and a supportive policy environment. Almost two years into the pandemic, FQHCs in multiple states are reimbursed at the same Prospective Payment System (PPS) (PDF) rate for in-person, video, and audio-only visits. The new flexibility to deliver audio-only visits was a welcome change. It was widely recognized that, due to the digital divide, audio-only visits would play an essential role in maintaining access to care for many populations. An audio-only visit was far better than the alternative at the time: no visit at all. Currently, experts who call for the permanent reimbursement of audio-only visits cite concerns for the underserved. They argue that given the widespread lack of broadband, limited digital literacy, and reduced access to devices, requiring video visits may leave certain patients behind and exacerbate inequities in health care. While this argument had merit in the first year of the pandemic, the risk benefit calculation of audio-only visits has changed, and it is increasingly important to protect patients from potentially lower-quality audio-only visits. We discuss how ongoing delivery of audio-only visits can reduce the quality of care among low-income populations and contribute to health disparities. At the same time, the reliance on audio-only visits may be preventing innovation that could improve video and in-person health care visits for all populations. Ongoing delivery of audio-only visits can reduce the quality of care among low-income populations and contribute to health disparities. Share on Twitter In the spring of 2020, audio-only visits were a lifeline at a time of uncertainty and helped address a critical need when the delivery system was desperate for quick solutions. Numerous data sources showed high use of audio-only visits in this period (11–48 percent of visits), particularly among low-income and older adults. Even though estimates of audio-only use from claims data were high, they were likely underestimates of the total number of visits being delivered. This is the case because of challenges and inconsistencies with coding telehealth visits and the tendency for scheduled video visits to become audio-only visits when technical difficulties arise. For example, using claims data, Medicare estimated that one in three telehealth visits in the spring of 2020 were audio-only visits. However, data from the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey showed that the majority of beneficiaries (56 percent) who had telehealth visits reported that they were exclusively audio-only. The Variation in Use Across Settings As the COVID-19 pandemic continued, audio-only visits retreated in some settings but remained dominant in others. Studies of the commercially insured demonstrated that as in-person visits rebounded in 2021, telehealth visits in general, and audio-only visits in particular, declined and play an increasingly minor role. In contrast, in the summer of 2021, 32 percent of FQHCs (PDF) across the United States reported that the majority of their total visits continued to be audio-only. A study of 43 large FQHC networks in California demonstrated ongoing, high-volume delivery (PDF) of audio-only visits in primary care despite receiving technical assistance and funding to grow their telehealth programs. Quality Concerns with Audio-Only Visits Audio-only visits can increase access to care, but this key advantage may come at the expense of quality. Evidence of the quality of audio-only visits in primary care is scant but concerning. First, clinicians report that audio-only visits are not as effective. Challenges range from the relatively minor (for example, not being able to assess facial expressions) to major issues (for example, not being able to verify the patient's identity). Studies have shown that clinicians can miss visual cues and struggle with establishing rapport with patients, and visits are shorter. Additionally, patients report lower satisfaction and comprehension rates. Even as new data emerge about the quality of audio-only visits, it is clear that some patients, including many commercially insured patients, are largely getting more evidence-based, tested services (in-person and video visits) while low-income patients are getting an untested service. Furthermore, cervical cancer screening rates, child weight assessment and counseling, and depression screening and follow-up at FQHCs declined with telehealth (predominantly audio-only) use. Drivers of Audio-Only Visits The variation in audio-only use across different populations is likely not fully explained by differences in which conditions are clinically appropriate for audio-only visits or by patient readiness for video visits. Rather, reimbursement, provider preferences, and organizational priorities are playing a significant role in determining how many in-person visit slots there are, and by extension, which patients get audio-only, video, or in-person visits. In October 2021, 33 percent of FQHC visits in California and 24 percent in Arizona, two states that reimburse FQHCs the full PPS for audio-only visits, were conducted virtually. Contrast that with South Dakota (a state that stopped reimbursing for audio-only visits in its Medicaid program as of July 2021 (PDF)), which only saw 5 percent of visits conducted virtually in the same time period. Although the digital divide is a significant problem in the United States that requires focused attention, it cannot fully explain the variation. A recent paper in Medical Care showed that provider behavior and organizational factors, as opposed to patient digital barriers, are playing the largest role in audio-only visits. Sixty-six percent of Medicare beneficiaries who were exclusively offered audio-only visits during the pandemic had access to telehealth-compatible devices and to the internet. Creating Conditions for High-Quality Telehealth Care At present, 22 state Medicaid programs allow for reimbursement for audio-only visits, with nine states adding reimbursement to permanent policy since the spring of 2021. The trend is to increase access to audio-only visits in the interest of health equity. However, telehealth experts have pointed out that failing to rein in audio-only visits risks escalating costs and creating a two-tiered system (PDF) in which affluent patients get video and in-person visits and low-income patients get telephone calls. It may be that this two-tiered system is already coming to fruition and is now harder to justify in the name of emergency response than it was in the spring of 2020. In March 2021, we argued that reimbursement of audio-only visits should continue for several years beyond the public health emergency to avoid exacerbating disparities in access. However, given emerging data about the prominence of audio-only visits in low-income communities, we now have concerns about this approach. Generous parity reimbursement for audio-only visits may be creating perverse incentives to deliver substandard care to the most underserved. It also may be stifling innovation that could be occurring in the delivery of video and in-person visits. Generous parity reimbursement for audio-only visits may be creating perverse incentives to deliver substandard care to the most underserved. Share on Twitter The patients who have challenges accessing video visits are the same patients who face barriers accessing in-person care. Instead of offering scheduled audio-only visits, health systems could be incentivized to address the social determinants of health that create barriers to higher-quality visits. For example, they could partner with community groups to provide transportation to appointments, provide access to low-cost electronic devices, invest in accessible telehealth platforms, create telehealth access points in the community, and train telehealth navigators. Audio-only visits are a powerful tool for emergency response, and over time researchers and clinicians will identify situations in which audio-only visits alone, or as a component of hybrid care models, can support comparable care. But in the coming months, it may be time to consider limiting audio-only visits in the pursuit of health equity. Lori Uscher-Pines is a senior policy researcher and Lucy Schulson is an associate physician policy researcher at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation. This commentary was first published on December 17, 2012 on Health Affairs Blog. Copyright ©2021 Health Affairs by Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc. Commentary gives RAND researchers a platform to convey insights based on their professional expertise and often on their peer-reviewed research and analysis. < Previous News Next News >

Now is the time for doctors to shape what’s next on telehealth Tanya Albert Henry, Contributing News Writer, American Medical Assoc. More than a year and a half into this pandemic, medicine finds itself with a unique opportunity: A chance to rethink and overhaul the way care is delivered. More than a year and a half into this pandemic, medicine finds itself with a unique opportunity: A chance to rethink and overhaul the way care is delivered. Telehealth, which a minority of patients and physicians used prior to COVID-19’s emergence, is now a household word. And survey after survey shows that patients like the convenience, believe they are getting quality care and still feel connected to their physicians. Most physicians, too, have found telehealth to be a great way to connect with patients when appropriate. “There is no question at this point in time, when you think back on the past 18 months, it’s our opportunity to change completely how we deliver care,” according to Joseph C. Kvedar, MD, professor of dermatology at Harvard Medical School and the American Telemedicine Association’s board chair. Dr. Kvedar made that point during a virtual gathering as part of the AMA Telehealth Immersion Program. The boot camp event featured experts and stakeholders from around the country, who discussed the potential for long-term telehealth programs, raised the questions that need to be considered as telemedicine evolves, and examined the challenges that physicians and patients face moving forward. “I would urge you not to think of virtual video visits as the sky or the ceiling or the vision, but as the floor and the beginning, and the first step into what I would call a real hybrid world with digital-first, with digital tools for our patients where patients instinctively turn to a digital device when they need health care and go from there,” Dr. Kvedar said. The boot camp also included a panel discussion about health-at-home models and strategies, as well as breakout sessions on creating telehealth value in obstetrics and gynecology, and renal medicine. The Telehealth Immersion Program is part of the AMA STEPS Forward™ Innovation Academy , which enables physicians to learn from peers and experts and discover ways to implement time-saving practice innovation strategies. Many questions to answer Data may show that the percentage of telehealth visits as a whole are down compared with the beginning of the pandemic, but Dr. Kvedar said there’s another story to be told. Data from one large payer shows that telehealth is shifting from local physicians and health care organizations to national care providers. In April 2020, 96% of all telehealth claims were local, while national providers accounted for just 4%. One year later, the share of national-provider claims rose to 11%. One big question going forward, he asked, is who is going to deliver telehealth services? “Do we want our own doctors to be providing these telehealth services or do we want to go through a third party,” said Dr. Kvedar, co-chair of the AMA Digital Medicine Payment Advisory Group. “The good news is you will have access either way. But … we have to ponder how we want that to go, and I think we have a role to play in making those decisions or at least in influencing them.” Among the other questions that need to be answered going forward: How do you plan while facing payment uncertainty? What will it cost a practice to offer telehealth and what will make the most financial sense for each practice? How do you rethink calculations of overhead? What are the workforce implications? For example, what new roles will be needed to accommodate telehealth properly? How do you define when it will be best to see a patient via telehealth versus coming into the office? Advocate, advocate, advocate Dr. Kvedar asked the boot-camp attendees to send their elected officials a letter describing what has worked in telemedicine and what is needed. He also recommended talking to your human resource professional and health plan contact to let them know what you and your patients need to create a health system that works best. The benefits of expanded telemedicine are clear. Join physicians who are advocating to permanently expand virtual care coverage. https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/now-time-doctors-shape-what-s-next-telehealth?smclient=9a5368e1-1650-11ec-83c8-18cf24ce389f&utm_source=salesmanago&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=default < Previous News Next News >