NEWS A collection of relevant articles providing: Telemedicine trends Industry insights Innovation updates Funding developments Legislation tracking Statutory analysis And more... Industry News Q&A: How retail healthcare, telehealth trends could evolve in 2023 Sanjula Jain, senior vice president of market strategy and chief research officer at Trilliant Health, discusses the future of virtual care and how emerging retail players will affect the industry. December 16, 2022 Read More UCHealth slashes code blues up to 70% with telehealth technologies The academic medical center uses tele-sitter and virtual ICU platforms for a program it calls Virtual Deterioration. December 20, 2022 Read More Leveraging Telehealth Platforms to Enhance Provider Workflows, Adoption Implementing a telehealth platform can positively impact provider workflows in numerous ways, including easing administrative burdens, thereby leading to greater provider adoption and satisfaction. December 28, 2022 Read More Telehealth helps stop suicidal ideation for many patients, study finds One person dies from suicide every 11 minutes in the U.S. A new study shows that telemedicine can be used to treat more severe mental illness – contrary to previous thought. December 29, 2022 Read More Telehealth May Be Rural Healthcare’s Lifeline As a new year dawns, it seems like a stock-taking time in U.S. healthcare. Skyrocketing costs, underwater margins, a depleted workforce and sicker patients have most hospitals and systems thinking existential thoughts about 2023, none more so than rural facilities. December 28, 2022 Read More

How Americans Feel About Telehealth: One Year Later Sykes.com April 21, 2021 In March 2020 and 2021 we polled 2,000 adults to discover their perspectives on and experience with telehealth — how have opinions changed one year into the COVID-19 pandemic? Pre-pandemic, telehealth was much more of a novelty than a necessity in the healthcare industry. The idea of contacting your doctor remotely for care was promising, but there were major hurdles — obstacles that would require time, effort, and ingenuity to overcome. Then, COVID-19 created a need for safe, distant medical care and advice. And necessity, like always, is the mother of invention (or in this case, adoption). Suddenly, millions of patients who were once walk-ins became logins, and soon, all that was necessary to get a quality checkup was a stable Wi-Fi connection. SYKES’ March 2020 telehealth survey revealed new insights on what Americans thought about the rise of virtual visits to the doctor and the concept of telehealth in general. At that point, telehealth was still a radical idea, and phrases like “new normal” had yet to overstay their welcome. Research outlined in the SYKES Fall 2020 telehealth apps report made it clear that all kinds of new users had already begun scheduling consultations in cyberspace due to COVID-19. But now, with vaccines being administered all over the world, will this mean a decline in socially distanced telehealth services too? Or will patients still want access to virtual doctor visits even after distance is no longer a factor? To find out, we asked 2,000 Americans in March 2021 how their opinions on telehealth have changed over the past year, what they’ve experienced, and what they think should stick around even after vaccines are widely available. For full story: https://www.sykes.com/resources/reports/how-americans-feel-about-telehealth-now/ < 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 >

Leveraging Telehealth Platforms to Enhance Provider Workflows, Adoption eVisit December 28, 2022 Implementing a telehealth platform can positively impact provider workflows in numerous ways, including easing administrative burdens, thereby leading to greater provider adoption and satisfaction. The pandemic drove telehealth use to new heights. Even though usage appears to be stabilizing, healthcare stakeholders largely agree that telehealth is here to stay, and they are making virtual care a vital part of their care delivery model. Polls conducted by the American Medical Association show that 80 percent of physicians said they were using telehealth tools in 2022, up from 28 percent in 2019 and only 14 percent in 2016. Further, in 2022, about 75 percent of physicians said being able to offer remote care was an important reason to use digital health tools, up from 60 percent in 2016. From the patient perspective, the benefits of telehealth, such as improved healthcare quality and patient experience, have become increasingly apparent. Epic conducted a research study analyzing 35 million telehealth visits between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2022. They found that "in nearly every specialty studied, most patients who had a telehealth visit did not require an in-person follow-up appointment in that specialty in the next three months." Only two of the 31 specialties — fertility and obstetrics — saw in-person follow-up rates above 50 percent, while genetics, nutrition, endocrinology, and mental health/psychiatry had in-person follow-up rates of 15 percent or less. But, as telehealth is integrated alongside in-person care, provider organizations must ensure they are selecting the right platform for their facility's unique needs and implementing them in a way that addresses — rather than adds to — clinician workflow challenges. KEY TELEHEALTH CAPABILITIES TO IMPROVE PROVIDER WORKFLOWS Amid the rapid rise in the adoption and use of telehealth during the pandemic, providers have faced several challenges in setting up telehealth programs. One of the most significant difficulties is related to the technology available, notes Eric Thrailkill, Venture Partner, Founder of the Telehealth Academy, and Chairman of Project Healthcare at the Nashville Entrepreneur Center. "While these solutions 'worked' per se, they were not designed to help health systems facilitate a hybrid care model with a goal to provide personalized care, regardless of location," he says. "During the shutdowns, almost all provider organizations were completely dedicated to supporting COVID-related patients and/or working through the backlog of previously scheduled appointments. Telehealth, due to the relaxation of certain federal and state regulatory requirements, consisted of phone-based services and two-way video technologies — speed to deploy was the operating mantra." Provider organizations succeeded in rapidly deploying new technologies, but they did not have time to optimize their workflows to account for certain processes — like documentation and revenue cycle — and support overarching population health and chronic care goals. During the pandemic, 'offering telehealth' could simply mean offering a two-way video solution. But now, with a couple of years of experience and data to pull from, providers are able to build robust telehealth programs to pair with in-person care. In short, a telehealth program looks at creating both a personal and efficient experience for the provider and patient before, during, and after the visit. Two-way video technology is just one piece of the puzzle. "Telehealth platforms should contain a virtual triage where location and assignment of a provider could occur," Thrailkill says. "This would also enable an appropriate assessment to ensure higher acuity visits are prioritized over lower acuity visits." For effective triage, relevant care teams must be able to easily coordinate their team and the patients in the virtual waiting room, chat with the patient ahead of, during, and post-visit, access the appointment, and interact with the patients while accurately documenting the encounter in their EHR and scheduling follow-up appointments. The digital experience should be smooth and the UI/UX strong to support adoption and satisfaction. Anything captured by the telehealth platform, say an image or an attachment, must have bidirectional clinical data flows enabled with the EHR to ensure the complete patient picture is captured for the patient's health record and billing and reporting purposes. Additionally, Thrailkill notes that as provider organizations become increasingly focused on addressing social determinants of health needs, they should consider telehealth platforms that can ingest data from multiple sources. Having this data at their fingertips at the point of care can help clinicians provide wraparound care services, including connecting patients with social services and community resources. Not only is a platform's ability to gather data from various sources essential to the success of hybrid care models, but so is seamless data exchange, which helps ensure continuity of care. "Continuity of care is the set of processes whereby the patient and his/her physician-led care team are involved and cooperating over time to achieve the highest level of quality of care," Thrailkill says. "This is difficult, if not impossible, given the fragmentation and healthcare data silos that exist today — both outside and inside provider organizations and health systems." Thus, telehealth platforms should have integration capabilities that provide clinicians with data from prior visits and information from facilities outside the organization where the patient has received care. But Thrailkill also cautions that providers should keep in mind patient rights regarding consent, privacy, and security when developing hybrid care models that leverage telehealth. IMPROVING WORKFLOWS ENHANCES PROVIDER SATISFACTION Selecting the right platform can help healthcare organizations optimize provider workflows, thereby boosting provider adoption and satisfaction. Providers at every level want to practice at "the top of their license," that is, utilize the highest level of their education and experience to deliver care, Thrailkill notes. For physicians, the health system's most expensive clinician, tasks like documentation and prior authorization processes can get in the way of this goal. Prior authorization, in particular, is a critical pain point, as some healthcare payers have complex processes that require much time and effort. "All of these administrative burdens are no doubt contributing to workforce challenges present today across essentially every professional level," Thrailkill says. But by using telehealth platforms with integration capabilities and Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR)-based application programming interface structures, provider organizations can reduce administrative burdens like prior authorization processes through automation and enable them to lean on their medical assistants during the triage process of the telehealth visit. This increases the time available for patient care and optimizes capacity for the clinical team, he adds. Further, when implementing telehealth into hybrid care models, healthcare organizations should take a long-term view rather than regard telemedicine as a replacement for in-person care. "This will challenge the organization to think about the role of medical assistants, nurses, and specialty consult providers — not as follow-on activity, but incorporated into the visit," Thrailkill says. "This will ultimately lead to operational efficiencies and reduce the amount of administrative burden existing in early deployments of telehealth." As noted above, reducing administrative burdens and improving care delivery processes can lead to higher provider satisfaction, engagement levels, and adoption of virtual care across the health system. Incorporating telehealth is not a passing phase, and demand will likely grow in the years ahead. But to ensure its success, provider organizations must select technology that enhances provider workflows, thereby improving satisfaction and adoption. 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/leveraging-telehealth-platforms-to-enhance-provider-workflows-adoption < Previous News Next News >

New MACPAC Report to Congress: Recommendations to improve mental health access include telehealth Center for Connected Health Policy June 2021 Recommended ways to improve access to mental health services for adults, children, and adolescents enrolled in Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC) released its June 2021 Report to Congress last week that recommends ways to improve access to mental health services for adults, children, and adolescents enrolled in Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). While the report and recommendations did not evaluate telehealth directly, they did occasionally reference telehealth’s ability to increase access to mental health services and recommend that the promotion of telehealth be included in various programmatic guidance. For instance, the report highlights telehealth programs that connect youth to telehealth counseling services and recommends the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) issue joint guidance addressing how Medicaid and CHIP can be used to fund a behavioral health crisis continuum that includes how telehealth can be used to ensure access to crisis care. They also recommend that opportunities to cover telehealth and other technology-enabled services be described in CMS and SAMHSA guidance specific to children and adolescents with significant mental health conditions. The report additionally looks at how to promote care integration through electronic health records (EHRs) and value-based payment (VBP) programs, which include measures related to expanded use of telehealth. It also discusses the non-emergency transportation (NEMT) benefit in Medicaid, mentioning that many changes in how the program is administered are occurring which require additional data to assess its value, such as how expanded availability of telehealth services may lessen its need in certain circumstances. For more information, please access the full MACPAC report - https://www.macpac.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/June-2021-Report-to-Congress-on-Medicaid-and-CHIP.pdf < Previous News Next News >

Libraries Add Telehealth to the Rural Communities They Serve Mari Herreras October 20, 2022 In the early days of the Covid pandemic, Dianne Connery realized something needed to be done for people in her rural Texas community to help connect folks to their medical appointments. Connery, director of the Pottsboro Area Library in Pottsboro, Texas, said it started when one woman with pulmonary disease came to the library for help, desperate to meet with her doctor but too high risk to come to his office—a two-hour drive south to Dallas. “Libraries are such perfect places for this because often we have the fastest internet in town, and we are used to helping people with technology,” Connery said. Connery and her fellow librarians sprang into action—creating a private space in Connery’s office with her laptop that had a camera. That gesture allowed the woman to meet with her doctor and go over recent MRI results. “I had never lived in a rural town until 2010 and didn’t realize how hard it is to access digital technology. You need a solid infrastructure for robust internet. Rural communities like ours don’t have that,” she said. From that first telehealth appointment in Connery’s office grew the library’s telehealth program that’s received national recognition. However, it never would have happened without Connery, with support from the town council, having fiber installed to support a teen eSports program long before the start of the pandemic. More community members used Connery’s office those early telehealth appointments, but through a National Library of Medicine grant and a community appeal, she was able to create a private appointment space from an old junk room and purchase the needed hardware and equipment. The next step was a unique partnership she developed with the University of North Texas Health Sciences Center to pair patients with the medical providers they needed. People can be seen two days a week for those using Medicare and Medicaid. Another day of the week is reserved for behavioral health appointments and another day is reserved for folks seeing their regular health providers. Connery’s work on the telehealth program doesn’t end there. The American Heart Association recently provided her library with blood pressure kits members of the community can check out. They also received a grant to hire a community health care worker to do outreach and education at the library and community spaces like the American Legion and the VFW. Now she’s focused on developing a digital literacy curriculum with the help of a three-year grant that helped her hire a digital navigator. Connery said she’s excited to see other rural libraries in Texas start telehealth programs but hopes more funding loops back to libraries desperate for increases in their own budgets. Connery is part of a national consortium of libraries who meet monthly to discuss telehealth programming—a growing interest in other rural communities beyond her Texas borders. Last month, a new telehealth program recently launched at two rural Pima County Library branches in Ajo and Arivaca—the first of its kind in Arizona—allowing folks with transportation or internet issues access to their doctors without having to drive several hours across the desert to nearby Tucson. “A huge sense of relief,” is how one Ajo resident recently described her experience that helped her connect with her primary care doctor in Tucson about worrisome symptoms she experienced after recovering from Covid. At the Salazar-Ajo Library she was able to collect the vitals her doctor needed using equipment provided by the library. And in the privacy of the library’s meeting room, she met with her doctor via a laptop and the internet provided by the library to go over her symptoms and vitals. “Being able to take my vitals and provide those to my doctor seems really important,” the Ajo resident said. “… while I was on my call with her, she had me do my vitals. We started with the blood pressure cuff, and how to apply it. Then my oxygen with the pulse rate oximeter.” The end of the appointment her doctor determined that the symptoms were not uncommon for someone who has had Covid, allowing the Ajo resident some relief and a better understanding of her recovery. Daniela Buchberger, Pima County Library’s Ajo branch managing librarian, said the new program, Health Connect, provides a private room for telehealth medical appointments. Inside is a laptop with a camera and equipment needed for a patient to take their own vitals: a digital scale, a thermometer, a blood pressure cuff, and a pulse rate oximeter. A patient will need to have the link provided by their doctor, usually via email. Library staff, due to privacy restrictions, aren’t going to be able to help someone log-on or use the equipment although the patient can bring someone with them to their appointment in the study room. Each library has written instructions on laminated cards as well as easy-to-follow visuals to help guide their experience. According to the Pima County Library, Health Connect is made possible by the Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records, a division of the Secretary of State, with federal funds from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. It is a joint effort between the Library, Pima County Health Department, University of Arizona’s College of Nursing, the Arizona Telemedicine Program, and United Community Health Care. "Access to telehealth is essential for people to get the care they need when traveling to an in-person visit isn't possible,” said Ken Zambos, program manager for Workforce and Economic Development in Pima County. “By providing this service, the library is providing access to equipment that transforms healthcare delivery and positively affects healthcare outcomes." Buchberger said a library card isn’t needed to use the room. However, reservations are needed and available in hour and half increments. Each person using a room is expected to clean all equipment after use with alcohol wipes provided. A fan in the room will be used to provide white noise to help with privacy as much as possible. “We may not have as much traffic as other libraries, but we are an important part of the community. The library is free, so is the internet,” Buchberger said. “Not everyone here has a car or a computer, but they have us.” About the Author Mari Herreras is the newest member of the Arizona Telemedicine Program and Southwest Telehealth Resource Center teams, serving as Communications Manager. She has worked in marketing and communications in publishing and nonprofits, as well as an award-winning journalism career for community and alternative newsweeklies in Tucson, Los Angeles, Seattle, and Wenatchee, Washington. See original article: https://southwesttrc.org/blog/2022/libraries-add-telehealth-rural-communities-they-serve < Previous News Next News >

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

CCHP: Audio only vs. Live Video Use... Center for Connected Health Policy February 15, 2022 The National Telehealth Policy Resource Center The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) Office of Health Policy recently released a new Issue Brief titled National Survey Trends in Telehealth Use in 2021: Disparities in Utilization and Audio vs. Video Services. The analysis found a number of trends that can be helpful in understanding remaining telehealth barriers and their interaction with health care disparities. Utilizing Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey (HPS) information from 2021, the study focused on differences in use between live video and audio-only telehealth modalities. Overall findings showed that telehealth use was common and utilization rates were generally similar across most demographic subgroups, except those that were uninsured. Utilization rates of live-video telehealth, however, were found to be lower among underserved populations, such as those with lower incomes and Black, Latino, and Asian respondents. To read the full article: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/new-aspe-issue-brief-addresses-audio-only-vs-live-video-use-and-interaction-with-healthcare-disparities < Previous News Next News >

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

Digital Health Tools Transforming Pediatric Telemedicine, Teletherapy & Telehealth Dr. Maheu February 24, 2022 The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented rise in pediatric telemedicine to alleviate the strain of behavioral health issues. Unprecedented stressors abound. Children are now more often confined to their homes and are less able to socialize. They may be forced to adjust to their parents’ working from home. They may witness economic and emotional fluctuations that leave them more anxious than at any time in recent history. With the increased demand for care with a shortage of available pediatric behavioral professionals, many organizations have shifted to pediatric telemedicine and telehealth or teletherapy tools.. COVID 19 and Challenges for Pediatric Telemedicine for Behavioral Health A meta-analysis published in JAMA Network, pediatrics found that one in every four children suffered depression during the COVID-19 lockdown and the anxiety prevalence rate was 20.5%. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), compared to 2019, the number of mental health-related emergency visits in 2020 went up by 24% for children in the 5-11 age group and 31% in the 12-17 age group. The American Association of Pediatrics and the American Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have officially declared an emergency as pediatric behavioral health went through a crisis countrywide. Parents had pretty tough times getting support for pediatric behavioral health following the closure of clinics and shortage of pediatric-trained therapists. Digital health tools primarily developed for adult health care have been adapted to connect parents to trained child therapists to overcome geographical and pandemic-related barriers. Full article here: https://telehealth.org/pediatric-telemedicine-2/?smclient=f760e669-8538-11ec-83c8-18cf24ce389f&smconv=5bc4c379-a4c1-484f-a411-33ec93777504&smlid=12&utm_source=salesmanago&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=default < Previous News Next News >

NCQA Report: 3 Strategies to Close Telehealth Access Gaps Mark Melchionna May 16, 2022 The National Committee for Quality Assurance released a telehealth report that highlighted care disparities and strategies for improvement. May 16, 2022 - Prioritizing individual preferences and patient needs, breaking down regulatory barriers, and leveraging technology in an equitable manner can go a long way toward addressing the growing disparities in telehealth use, according to a white paper released by the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA). The white paper, titled The Future of Telehealth Roundtable, discusses ways to close gaps in telehealth use and access. The NCQA is a nonprofit organization that focuses on improving the quality of care and certifying various healthcare groups. Dig Deeper Pressure on Congress to Solidify Telehealth Access Builds GOP, Independent Senators Co-Sponsor Medicare Telehealth Access Bill Lawmakers Ask Congress to Create a Rural Telehealth Access Task Force As virtual care grows amid the COVID-19 pandemic, The Future of Telehealth Roundtable highlighted various areas that could be enhanced. The white paper derives from an October 2021 conference consisting of telehealth and technology experts from several prominent healthcare organizations, including MedStar Health. The experts noted that despite the expected benefits associated with telehealth, such as convenience and lower costs, disparities still exist within specific communities. According to the white paper, three strategies could help close care gaps as telehealth is further implemented. The first is creating telehealth services that cater to personal patient preferences and needs, as some individuals may face struggles due to their primary language and socioeconomic status. The second is addressing regulatory barriers to access and changing regulations to allow expanded clinician eligibility for licensure. The final strategy is ensuring that digital technology can be leveraged efficiently. For example, considering patient access levels to technology is critical because it determines how patients can be reached and how to best care for them. “Even prior to the pandemic, a change in healthcare delivery was on the horizon with ever-evolving advancements in technology,” said NCQA President Margaret E. O’Kane, in an accompanying press release. “As virtually based care expands, unique patient needs and preferences must be identified and prioritized so that telehealth can help us close the gaps in healthcare and not widen existing disparities.” The Future of Telehealth Roundtable also emphasized the continuing popularity of telehealth and that it will hold a place in the new normal. But as the implementation process continues with new technology, avoiding the digital divide is necessary to eliminate disparities. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, various studies have emphasized pinpointing the potential barriers to telehealth access. One study published in February revealed that Black patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) prefer recording and sharing blood pressure (BP) via a text-based program rather than an online patient portal. This is likely because the patient portal has higher technical requirements than text-based communication. Further, research published last November shows that patients with limited English proficiency were less likely to use video when accessing virtual services during the pandemic than adults who could speak English comfortably. For full article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/ncqa-report-3-strategies-to-close-telehealth-access-gaps < 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 >

As 'telehealth cliff' Looms, Hundreds of Healthcare Orgs Urge Congress to Act Mike Miliard, Healthcare IT News July 2021 More than 400 healthcare and technology organizations are calling on Capitol Hill to eliminate arbitrary restrictions, while helping FQHCs and critical access hospitals offer wider access to virtual care. Leading healthcare industry stakeholders on Monday implored top leaders in the House and Senate to help ensure, among other imperatives, that "Medicare beneficiaries [don't] abruptly lose access to nearly all recently expanded coverage of telehealth." WHY IT MATTERS In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, 430 organizations – including the American Telemedicine Association, HIMSS (parent company of Healthcare IT News), Amazon, Amwell, Teladoc, Zoom, Epic, Allscripts, Kaiser Permanente, Mayo Clinic, Mass General Brigham, UPMC and many others – called on them to capitalize on the progress that's been made on telehealth before it's too late. If they don't act before the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency, the groups said, Medicare beneficiaries "will lose access to virtual care options which have become a lifeline to many." The groups also called on Congress to get rid of arbitrary restrictions on where patients can use telehealth services, remove limitations on telemental health services, authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to allow additional telehealth "practitioners, services and modalities," and help ensuring that federally qualified health centers, critical access hospitals, rural health centers and providers like them can can furnish telehealth services. Flexibilities enabled under the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act and the CARES Act "have allowed clinicians across the country to scale delivery and provide all Americans – many for the first time – access to high-quality virtual care," the groups wrote," the groups said. "In response, health care organizations across the nation have dramatically transformed and made significant investments in new technologies and care delivery models, not only to meet COVID driven patient demand, but to prepare for America’s future health care needs. "Unfortunately, this progress is in jeopardy," they wrote. "Many of the telehealth flexibilities are temporary and limited to the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Without action from Congress, Medicare beneficiaries will abruptly lose access to nearly all recently expanded coverage of telehealth when the COVID-19 PHE ends. This would have a chilling effect on access to care across the entire U.S. healthcare system, including on patients that have established relationships with providers virtually, with potentially dire consequences for their health." Telehealth, these stakeholders argue, "is not a COVID-19 novelty, and the regulatory flexibilities granted by Congress must not be viewed solely as pandemic response measures. Patient satisfaction surveys and claims data from CMS and private health plans tell a compelling story of the large-scale transformation of our nation’s health care system over the past year and, importantly, demonstrate strong patient interest and demand for telehealth access post-pandemic." The letter notes that over the past year and half, virtual care has become ubiquitous, popular, efficient – and has helped address care disparities. One in four Medicare beneficiaries – 15 million – accessed telehealth between the summer and fall of 2020, and 91% of them said they were satisfied with their video visits. Some 75% oof Americans "now report having a strong interest in using telehealth moving forward," the letter notes. "Congress not only has the opportunity to bring the U.S. health care system into the 21st century, but the responsibility to ensure that the billions in taxpayer funded COVID investments made during the pandemic are not simply wasted but used to accelerate the transformation of care delivery, ensuring access to high quality virtual care for all Americans," the groups said. The letter calls on Congress to ensure HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra "has the tools to transition following the end of the public health emergency and ensure telehealth is regulated the same as in-person services." In addition, it asks lawmakers to attend to four key priorities: 1. Remove Obsolete Restrictions on the Location of the Patient and Provider. Congress must permanently remove the Section 1834(m) geographic and originating site restrictions to ensure that all patients can access care where they are. The response to COVID-19 has shown the importance of making telehealth services available in rural and urban areas alike. To bring clarity and provide certainty to patients and providers, we strongly urge Congress to address these restrictions in statute by striking the geographic limitation on originating sites and allow beneficiaries across the country to receive virtual care in their homes, or the location of their choosing, where clinically appropriate and with appropriate beneficiary protections and guardrails in place. 2. Maintain and Enhance HHS Authority to Determine Appropriate Providers, Services, and Modalities for Telehealth. Congress should provide the Secretary with the flexibility to expand the list of eligible practitioners who may furnish clinically appropriate telehealth services. Similarly, Congress should ensure that HHS and CMS maintain the authority to add or remove eligible telehealth services – as supported by data and demonstrated to be safe, effective, and clinically appropriate – through a predictable regulatory process that gives patients and providers transparency and clarity. Finally, Congress should give CMS the authority to reimburse for multiple telehealth modalities, including audio-only services, when clinically appropriate. 3. Ensure Federally Qualified Health Centers, Critical Access Hospitals, and Rural Health Clinics Can Furnish Telehealth Services After the PHE. FQHCs, CAHs, and RHCs provide critical services to underserved communities and have expanded telehealth services after restrictions were lifted under the CARES Act and through executive actions. Congress should ensure that FQHCs, CAHs, and RHCs can offer virtual services post-COVID and work with stakeholders to support fair and appropriate reimbursement for these key safety net providers and better equip our healthcare system to address health disparities. 4. Remove Restrictions on Medicare Beneficiary Access to Mental and Behavioral Health Services Offered Through Telehealth. Without Congressional action, a new requirement for an in-person visit prior to access to mental health services through telehealth will go into effect for most Medicare beneficiaries. We urge Congress to reject arbitrary restrictions that would require an in-person visit prior to a telehealth visit. Not only is there no clinical evidence to support these requirements, but they also exacerbate clinician shortages and worsen health inequities by restricting access for those individuals with barriers preventing them from traveling to in-person care.15 Removing geographic and originating site restrictions only to replace them with in-person restrictions is short-sighted and will create additional barriers to care. THE LARGER TREND The concept of a "telehealth cliff" – an abrupt end to the progress made in expanding and enabling virtual care once the pandemic is finally over – has been of concern for some time. Since early 2021, an array of telehealth-focused bills have been introduced in the House and Senate, but the major concerns outlined in the July 26 letter are still outstanding and yet to be addressed by statute. ON THE RECORD "With 430 stakeholders in lockstep, and unprecedented bipartisan support for these legislative priorities, we urge Congress to act swiftly to ensure that telehealth remains permanently available following expiration of the public health emergency," said Kyle Zebley, VP of public policy at the American Telemedicine Association in a statement. "The ATA remains committed to working collaboratively to ensure Medicare beneficiaries can continue to access care when and where they need it." “Evidence-based connected care has been at the core of our nation’s health resiliency throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and has established its important role in improving healthcare quality, access, and value for all Americans," added Rob Havasy, managing director of the Personal Connected Health Alliance. "HIMSS and PCHAlliance urge Congress to swiftly act to make the Medicare coverage changes permanent, to give patients and providers access to the tools they need and deserve." < Previous News Next News >

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

Bipartisan Policy Center Report Highlights Telehealth Policy Considerations CCHP November 01, 2022 Last month, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) released a comprehensive report on The Future of Telehealth After COVID-19. The report is based upon an analysis of Medicare Telehealth Utilization and Spending Impacts 2019-2021, stakeholder input and interviews, a literature review, and a national consumer survey. The BPC report examines the impact of increased access to telehealth during the pandemic and makes recommendations to policymakers on which COVID-19 policy expansions should be maintained post-public health emergency (PHE). Ultimately, BPC urges the federal government to extend emergency flexibilities for two years to preserve access while further evaluating telehealth effectiveness. In its analysis, BPC made a number of key findings showcasing telehealth’s ability to alleviate access barriers for Medicare beneficiaries, address inequities in access and outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities, low-income earners, and individuals with chronic conditions, as well as improve patient continuity of care. The report also noted that patients and providers generally feel satisfied with telehealth services. Other findings include: A decrease in telehealth utilization since initial pandemic peaks, although 2021 rates remained nearly 40 times higher than pre-pandemic telehealth visits Most telehealth visits were for primary care visits and 44% of all behavioral health visits in 2021 occurred via telehealth About 1 out of 5 telehealth visits were audio-only in 2021 Telehealth utilization was higher in urban areas and for non-white beneficiaries Beneficiaries with disabilities and dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid were more likely to use telehealth in 2021 Medicare spending on telehealth remains a small percent of overall spending – for the outpatient codes BPC examined, telehealth spending was between 1.5% and 3.3% of total spending in 2020 and 2021 In applying its findings to policy recommendations, BPC discusses an attempt to balance competing goals, for instance the need to increase access to care against the need to ensure quality and cost-effectiveness. The report also highlights areas to focus future research and notes the need to examine telehealth outside of PHE conditions to truly generalize findings. In addition, BPC acknowledges limitations in its spending analysis that don’t factor in the potential reduction in long-term costs related to emergency room visits in correlation to increased telehealth visits. In addition to extending Medicare telehealth flexibilities for two years, key BPC recommendations to Congress and the Biden administration include: Maintain access to telehealth for Medicare beneficiaries regardless of location or medical diagnosis – including the home/patient location as an authorized originating site and removing geographic limitations (with protections to require providers to see patients in-person or refer to in-person care when necessary) Authorize FQHCs/RHCs to permanently serve as distant site providers Continue access to primary care and behavioral health services with minor adjustments post-PHE (the recommendation notes that if further research supports it, CMS could consider limiting certain services to existing patient-provider relationships – except in rural areas and for alternative payment methodology (APM) providers) Continue audio-only coverage and incorporate audio-only into telehealth definition (post-PHE audio-only restrictions should limit coverage to established patients and at patient request) Permanently expand asynchronous services beyond virtual check-ins and Alaska and Hawaii demonstration projects for both new and established patients Make Health and Human Services (HHS) 1135 temporary waiver authority permanent for future PHEs Eliminate the requirement for in-person visits for telemental health services (BPC states this is an undue burden on those who cannot access behavioral health providers in-person) Require evaluation of controlled substance prescribing via telehealth and for non-hospice, non-cancer patients, first require an in-person exam prior to prescribing substances prone to abuse (BPC additionally recommends the Department of Justice (DOJ) follow through on its requirement to create a special telemedicine registration process to allow for certain in-person requirement exemptions) Refine reimbursement rates and end broad payment parity between telehealth and in-person care to offset any cost/utilization increases, including implementing different rates for audio-only and video visits In regard to transparency and consumer protections in particular, the report also recommends clear information to beneficiaries be provided regarding benefits appropriately delivered by telehealth and ensuring that beneficiaries consent to the use of telehealth. BPC additionally recommends the ability to distinguish between traditional and fully virtual providers be determined, and that enforcement resume related to HIPAA. In regard to fraud, waste, and abuse protections, the report calls for sufficient funding to the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to modernize and track telehealth use, the requiring of outlier provider audits, and that high-cost durable medical equipment (DME) and laboratory tests be limited to established patients, unless providers are part of APMs. To improve data quality, the BPC suggests CMS simplify telehealth billing and develop additional guidance for providers to ensure uniformity and coding accuracy. Lastly, the BPC recommends requiring MedPAC complete a formal evaluation of post-PHE telehealth impacts on access, quality, patient outcomes, and cost to truly determine long-term trends and policies. BPC’s report is extremely thorough and highlights the many issues policymakers are facing in contemplating permanent telehealth policies. Some of BPC’s attempts to balance recommendations and exceptions to address concerns raise additional complexities behind the considerations further showcasing where policymakers and future research should focus. For instance, in terms of audio-only, BPC notes that continued coverage is critical for beneficiaries lacking broadband and technology access, although additional restrictions should be adopted to address concerns related to quality and potential for overuse. However, policymakers should consider whether these additional restrictions may ultimately limit the access the report describes as critical. In terms of payment parity, BPC notes that it has been an important tool to increase access to care and ensure that practitioners provide telehealth services. However, given payer and policymaker concerns, BPC recommends that perhaps the best post-PHE policy would be to cover certain telehealth services at higher rates than pre-PHE rates, but not necessarily equivalent to in-person rates. That may go against other recommendations in the BPC report to simplify telehealth billing, although ultimately BPC does state that CMS should look carefully at cost differentials when determining appropriate rates. Since many providers state that the cost and time of providing services via telehealth and in-person are equivalent it is important that researchers and policymakers look carefully at that issue. In addition, BPC suggests that different reimbursement rates may ensure access to in-person services, yet also states that parity in rates ensures access to telehealth services, showing the difficulty in sufficiently balancing these various considerations. Researchers and policymakers must pay careful attention to all perspectives and data around these issues in order to truly ensure telehealth’s ability to increase access to necessary health care. For additional details on BPC’s findings and recommendations, please view the report in its entirety. See original article: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/bipartisanpolicycenter-report-highlights-telehealth-policy-considerations-recommends-2-year-extension-of-federal-flexibilities-further-research < 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 >

CONNECT for Health Act Recently Reintroduced Center for Connected Health Policy May 2021 CCHP Breaks Down Key Elements in New Fact Sheet * < Previous News Next News >

Trends in Telehealth: CCHP's 50 State Telehealth Policy Summary Report, Fall 2022 Center for Connected Health Policy October 18, 2022 Today the Center for Connected Health Policy (CCHP) is releasing its bi-annual summary of state telehealth policy changes for Fall 2022. Additionally, we are also making available a summary chart showing where states stand on many key telehealth policies, as well as an infographic highlighting our key findings. The most current information in CCHP’s online policy finder tool may be exported for each state into a PDF document. The Fall 2022 summary report adds in two new jurisdictions, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands, and covers updates in state telehealth policy made between July and early September 2022. Note that in some cases, after a state was reviewed by CCHP, it is possible that the state may have passed a significant piece of legislation or implemented an administrative policy change that CCHP may not have captured. In those instances, the changes will be reviewed and catalogued in the upcoming Spring 2023 edition of CCHP’s Summary Report. As in previous editions, information in the policy finder remains organized into three categories: Medicaid reimbursement, private payer laws and professional requirements. Additionally, for this edition, CCHP received support from the National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) through funding from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to create a specific category on federally qualified health center (FQHC) Medicaid fee-for-service policies. FQHCs have many unique rules that apply to them that sometimes effect their ability to utilize telehealth, such as the definition of a visit/encounter in the Medicaid program. The new FQHC category takes these considerations into account and will help FQHCs be able to more easily navigate to the policies that specifically affect them. See full article: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/just-released-cchps-50-state-telehealth-policy-summary-report-fall-2022trends-in-telehealth-policy < Previous News Next News >

ATA AND ATA ACTION CO-LEAD LETTER TO THE U.S. SENATE SIGNED BY OVER 370 STAKEHOLDER ORGANIZATIONS SEEKING PERMANENCY FOR TELEHEALTH American Telemedicine Association September 13, 2022 WASHINGTON, DC, SEPTEMBER 13, 2022 – The American Telemedicine Association (ATA) and ATA Action co-led letter signed by 375 stakeholders urging the Senate to act this fall to ensure certainty for telehealth services. The letter asks the Senate to pass a two-year extension of the flexibilities and waivers allowing temporary access to telehealth put in place under the current public health emergency (PHE), while continuing to push for a permanent extension. Stakeholders are also pushing the Senate to include provisions to lift provider and patient location limitations, remove in-person requirements for telemental health, ensure continued access to clinically appropriate controlled substances without in-person requirements, and increase access to telehealth services in the commercial market, such as provisions in law set to expire at the end of the year that allow people with a high deductible health plan (HDHP) health savings account (HSA) to access telehealth coverage without first having to meet annual deductibles. The stakeholder letter was co-led by the Alliance for Connected Care, College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME), Connected Health Initiative, Consumer Technology Association, Executives for Health Innovation, Health Innovation Alliance, HIMSS, and Partnership to Advance Virtual Care. “This letter truly speaks from a strong, unified voice, representing the breadth of the healthcare industry. While we, over 375 strong, seek permanency for telehealth access, our hope is that the Senate will at least match the full two years of extensions envisioned by H.R. 4040,” said Kyle Zebley, senior vice president, public policy, the ATA, and executive director, ATA Action. “Further, in response to the recent actions of the House, the Senate should make great policies greater, by including those provisions left out of H.R. 4040. “Specifically, the Senate should make permanent, or at the very least extend the high deductible health plan (HDHP) health savings account (HSA) telehealth benefit set to expire at the end of the year and pass the remote prescribing provision to ensure continued access to clinically appropriate controlled substances without in-person requirements,” added Zebley. “When included with the policies recently passed with near unanimous support in the House, these additions will ensure Americans, particularly those in underserved and vulnerable communities, maintain access to quality healthcare.” To read a full copy of the stakeholder letter, please click here. About ATA Action ATA Action recognizes that telehealth and virtual care have the potential to transform the healthcare delivery system by improving patient outcomes, enhancing the safety and effectiveness of care, addressing health disparities, and reducing costs. ATA Action is a registered 501c6 company and an affiliated trade organization of the ATA. About the ATA As the only organization completely focused on advancing telehealth, theAmerican Telemedicine Association is committed to ensuring that everyone has access to safe, affordable, and appropriate care when and where they need it, enabling the system to do more good for more people. The ATA represents a broad and inclusive member network of leading healthcare delivery systems, academic institutions, technology solution providers and payers, as well as partner organizations and alliances, working to advance industry adoption of telehealth, promote responsible policy, advocate for government and market normalization, and provide education and resources to help integrate virtual care into emerging value-based delivery models. See full article: https://www.americantelemed.org/press-releases/ata-and-ata-action-co-lead-letter-to-the-u-s-senate-signed-by-over-370-stakeholder-organizations-seeking-permanency-for-telehealth/ < 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 >