Legislation Legislation New Mexico Legislation S.B. 93 - Broadband Access and Expansion Act H.B. 141 - ED Infrastructure Technology Definition S.B. 24 - Parity of Regulation of Telecommunication Federal Telehealth Legislatio n H.R. 7992 - Telehealth Act (2019-2020) H.R.3228 - VA Mission Telehealth Clarification Act (2019-2020) H.R.4900 - Telehealth Across State Lines Act (2019) H.R.5473 - EASE Behavioral Health Services Act (2019-2020) H.R.7233 - Knowing the Efficiency and Efficacy of Permanent Telehealth Options Act (2020) H.R.7338 - Advancing Telehealth Beyond COVID–19 Act (2020) S.2408 - Telehealth Across State Lines Act (2019) S.3988 - Enhancing Preparedness through Telehealth Act (2019-2020) S.4039 - TELEHEALTH HSA Act (2020) S.4216 - KEEP Telehealth Options Act (2020) Federal Broadband Legislation H .R.205 - To accelerate rural broadband deployment. H.R.4229 - Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act S.4021 - Accelerating Broadband Connectivity Act of 2020

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 >

Audio-Only Telehealth Visits During Pandemic Draw GAO Scrutiny Scott Mace October 03, 2022 The federal oversight agency recommends CMS adopt new coding procedures to compare care quality to in-person visits. With pandemic-fueled temporary waivers on telehealth leading to a surge in telehealth visits in 2020, especially on audio-only platforms, the practice is overdue for its own exam for effectiveness and privacy, according to a new Government Accounting Office (GAO) report. The use of telehealth services topped 53 million visits in the period between April and December 2020. During the same period in 2019, only 5 million such visits occurred. Many of those were conducted by phone or non-video telehealth, which was rarely allowed prior to the pandemic. [See also: CMS Proposes to Cut Audio_only Telehealth Coverage.] The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has monitored some risks to program integrity related to these telehealth waivers, but the GAO report found that CMS "lacks complete data on the use of audio-only technology and telehealth visits furnished in beneficiaries' homes," in part because no billing mechanism exists to identify all these telehealth visits. "Providers are not required to use available codes to identify all instances of audio-only visits," the GAO reported. "Moreover, providers are not required to use available codes to identify visits furnished in beneficiaries' homes." The GAO said this coding is important to monitor the quality of these telehealth services as compared to equivalent in-person services. "CMS has not comprehensively assessed the quality of telehealth services delivered under the waivers and has no plans to do so, which is inconsistent with CMS' quality strategy," the GAO said. "Without an assessment of the quality of telehealth services, CMS may not be able to fully ensure that services lead to improved health outcomes." The GAO offered three recommendations for CMS going forward: 1. Develop a new billing modifier or make clearer how to bill audio-only office visits for better tracking; 2. Require providers to use existing site of service codes when beneficiaries receive Medicare telehealth services at home; and 3. Assess the quality of telehealth services delivered during the public health emergency. Finally, the GAO urged the Health and Human Services Department's Office of Civil Rights to offer additional education, outreach, and other resources to providers to help them explain risks to privacy and security that patients may face during telehealth visits. Scott Mace is a contributing writer for HealthLeaders. See original article: https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/technology/audio-only-telehealth-visits-during-pandemic-draw-gao-scrutiny < 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 >

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

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 >

NM Telehealth Workgroup Hosted by the New Mexico Telehealth Alliance 7/29/2021 New Community Forum for NM Healthcare Peers on Telehealth Topics This is a monthly community forum to discuss telehealth issues with your healthcare peers. The intent is to help New Mexican systems advance remote care. Topics will change monthly and be directed by what the group members ask for. Hosted by the New Mexico Telehealth Alliance, our first session on July 29 is a collaboration with Presbyterian Healthcare Services and the University of New Mexico. We will explore audio only post-pandemic billing using HCPCS code G2252. Register here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/nm-telehealth-community-forum-registration-163947169397 < Previous News Next News >

AHA Requests Information on Telehealth Prescriptions for Controlled Substances Mark Melchionna December 05, 2022 The American Hospital Association has asked the Drug Enforcement Administration to release information regarding future telehealth regulations for prescribing controlled substances. Representing nearly 5,000 member hospitals, health systems, and other healthcare organizations, a letter from the American Hospital Association (AHA) asked that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) clarify future telehealth regulations for prescribing controlled substances and provide recommendations for an interim plan. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, some policies prohibited the use of telehealth for certain medical activities. For example, the Ryan Haight Act of 2008 amended the Controlled Substance Act to eliminate providers' ability to prescribe controlled substances through telehealth with no in-person visit beforehand. The act detailed the need for initial in-person evaluations before virtual prescribing controlled substances. However, exceptions to the in-person visit requirement can be enacted during public health emergencies (PHEs). This led the DEA to temporarily lift the in-person visit requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing patients to continue receiving controlled substance medications. Through the pandemic, the flexibilities helped support patients in various ways, including enabling prescriptions of controlled substances to be delivered via telehealth and allowing providers to use telephone evaluations to initiate buprenorphine prescribing, the AHA noted. The AHA sent the letter to the DEA to obtain further information regarding the future of these telehealth flexibilities. About 14 years ago, the Ryan Haight Act established the requirement that agencies issue a regulation that outlines the special registration process for telemedicine to waive the in-person requirement. Three years ago, the SUPPORT Act reinforced this policy. However, providers are continuing to wait for guidance with the concern that the expiration of the COVID-19 PHE will put them in a position where they cannot provide treatment. "With the expiration of the COVID-19 PHE currently scheduled for next year, this situation could come to pass as early as mid-January," the AHA wrote. Thus, the AHA has asked the DEA to provide proposed rules for the special registration for telemedicine process, noting that issues such as staffing shortages, provider burnout, and financial constraints would benefit from more time to reallocate resources to operationalize new regulation requirements. The letter also included a request for the DEA to provide an interim plan to support the continuity of care between the expiration of the COVID-19 PHE and the implementation of the special registration for telemedicine final rules. According to the AHA, the interim plan should include waiving the in-person requirement for prescribing buprenorphine. Further, the waiver should be transitioned and incorporated under the Opioid Epidemic PHE, according to the association. The letter also recommends that the DEA provide patients engaged in an episode of care that began virtually before the end of the COVID-19 PHE with a solution and support those who initiated an episode of care between the end of the COVID-19 PHE and the establishment of the final rules for special registration for telemedicine. The AHA letter comes as healthcare stakeholders urge Congress to solidify various telehealth flexibilities enacted during the pandemic. In December, a letter composed by the Connected Health Initiative (CHI) to the leaders of the US Senate and House Representatives asked that Congress continue the safe harbor for telehealth coverage by high-deductible health plans (HDHPs). In this letter, CHI noted its support for removing restrictions to telehealth access facing Medicare beneficiaries; however, it also asked that Congress separately extend the safe harbor for HDHPs to cover telehealth with first-dollar coverage. See original article: https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/aha-requests-information-on-telehealth-prescriptions-for-controlled-substances < Previous News Next News >

NMTHA Sponsors NMTHA Sponsors support our efforts in exchange for promotional benefits: Sponsorship Available to members and non-members All Sponsor benefits included Does not include member benefits Membership is not required for sponsorship Better Access. Better Outcomes. More about AmplifyMD AmplifyMD is a multi-specialty physician practice providing virtual consults via telehealth. Our doctors cover all E & M specialties, including; Psychiatry, Cardiology, Neurology, Infectious Disease, Orthopedics, Hematology, Oncology, etc. At AmplifyMD, we’ve streamlined workflows so you can manage everything from one screen. By centralizing all your virtual care delivery onto a single turnkey platform, we’ve alleviated the cost, time, and frustration burden of setting up and managing multiple hospitals and telehealth systems. More about ENVIVE ENVIVE Solutions, LLC is a nationally certified women-owned business located in the enchanted southwest. We provide quality remote and onsite strategic management, project planning, coaching and consultation, and implementation support services to organizations across the United States - with expertise in large-scale collaborations and human-centered initiatives (e.g., behavioral health, human services). We lead and support teams and projects through all phases of strategic management - from conceptualization to successful implementation. For Members and Non-Members NMTHA Sponsors (Membership not required) $2,500 $ 2,500 (Member benefits not included. Membership is available separately.) Valid for one year Select Tax-deductible sponsorship is donation to 501c3 organization Organization featured on NMTHA's dedicated Sponsor webpage Webinar presentation to NMTHA Board of Directors Poster presentation at NMTHA's Annual Town Hall 1-page contract with defined mutual expectations

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

New Coding Modifier Offers Opportunity To Investigate Audio-Only Telehealth Alexander Beschloss, Ryan Van Ramshorst, Chethan Bachireddy, Christopher Chen, Andrey Ostrovsky November 18, 2022 Prior to the pandemic, Medicaid program coverage of audio-only telehealth services was limited. During the early stages of the pandemic, Medicaid beneficiaries were significantly less likely to complete telehealth visits compared to commercially insured patients. This was likely due to a series of obstacles, including: lack of access to high-quality broadband, a device with video capability, requisite digital skills, and private space to conduct the visit. For example, in 2019, roughly one in four Medicaid enrollees lived in a home without internet or with limited computer access. That said, Medicaid beneficiaries do not have significantly less access to devices with video capability (such as smartphones) than other patient populations, suggesting network connectivity poses more of a barrier than device access. Even further, nearly 50 percent of low-income patients in the US may not have requisite digital health literacy to use virtual telehealth. However, considering that 86 percent of Medicaid beneficiaries own a smartphone, it may be inferred that many more have sufficient digital literacy to engage in audio-only care rather than audio-visual telehealth. Network connectivity and low rates of digital literacy are two barriers that highlight the importance of creating the infrastructure to deliver and measure audio-only visits is of increased necessity. It was in this context that, once the pandemic struck, Medicaid agencies changed policies to augment access to telehealth services. For example, 17 state Medicaid agencies expanded reimbursement to include multiple modalities of telehealth, including audio-only. These changes particularly supported patient populations who had transportation, childcare, employment, or income barriers that prevent in-person care—challenges that are more prevalent in the Medicaid population. These policy innovations narrowed the reimbursement gap among in-person, audio-only, and audio-visual visits. In fact, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently investigated differences in patient populations who receive telehealth audio-only versus audiovisual use in 2021. For telehealth visits, Medicaid beneficiaries were more likely to use audio-only care than were privately insured patients (35.1 percent versus 45.5 percent). They discovered that compared to White patients, who used audio-only care for 38.1 percent of their telehealth visits, Latino, Black, and Asian patients did so at rates of 49.3 percent, 46.4 percent, and 48.7 percent, respectively. Patients with less than a high school education used it at 61.9 percent of their telehealth visits, compared to those with greater than a bachelor’s degree, who did such at a rate of only 32.6 percent. Across income brackets, there is an inverse relationship between household income and audio-only telehealth use. As the use of audio-only telehealth became more widespread among Medicaid beneficiaries, state Medicaid leaders needed a mechanism to measure clinical outcomes, health care costs, and patient experiences related to audio-only telehealth. Providers also needed a dedicated billing construct that could be used across public and private payers to streamline billing processes. Until recently, such mechanisms simply did not exist. And so, due to these insufficient coding constructs, several Medicaid medical directors spearheaded an application to the American Medical Association (AMA) to create a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) modifier that would specifically designate audio-only services. In September 2021, the AMA CPT Editorial Panel accepted the addition of the CPT Modifier 93 code for synchronous audio-only telehealth, and the code became active on January 1, 2022. This article provides an overview of the rationale for and process of creating the CPT Modifier 93 code. Potential Benefits Of Audio-Only CPT Modifier Why was the creation of a new audio-only modifier necessary? Several reasons: data collection, policy implementation, health care equity, widespread need, and service specificity. The CPT 93 modifier permits differentiation among audio-only, audiovisual, and in-person care at the administrative level, which subsequently allows health service researchers to monitor and evaluate the use and clinical efficacy among these methods of care delivery. Prior to the introduction of this modifier, such high-quality analyses were impossible to do at scale. Along with the increase in all modalities of telehealth use since the COVID-19 public health emergency (63 fold increase year over year between 2019 and 2020), a survey performed by HHS (across all 50 states and the District of Columbia) discovered that 45.5 percent of all telehealth usage amongst Medicaid beneficiaries was audio-only. Taking things one step farther, several state legislatures including Washington, Connecticut, and New York have recently passed laws mandating or allowing coverage for audio-only services. Audio-only telehealth is being highly used, therefore having a mechanism to collect related data is vital. Implementing this modifier will serve as a tool for policy makers to make informed adjustments in policy around patients who use audio-only services. Implementation of this modifier will also enable claims-based research to monitor for disparities between audiovisual and audio-only care to ensure that all modalities of telehealth are provided in a sustainable, equitable, and high-quality fashion. Additionally, because different states have implemented varying strategies to cover audio-only services during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE), the CPT 93 modifier will help health services researchers and policy makers discern the differences between coverage approaches, information that will be crucial in standardizing telehealth data collection/storage across states. From a coding perspective, adding an audio-only modifier to existing and widely used CPT codes is a far more feasible option than alternatives such as individual payers developing their own coding modifiers. That approach would become unreasonably burdensome on providers who would subsequently have to learn and bill using the system established by each payer. Previous Codes Did Not Suffice While CPT codes for services provided through telephone exist, they do not specify the enormous range of behavioral health services, therapies, maternity-related care, post-operative guidance, and other services that have been successfully delivered via audio-only technology since the COVID-19 PHE. For example, CPT code 99441 represents a “telephone evaluation and management service; 5–10 minutes of medical discussion,” which gives no specificity regarding what type of care was delivered. In comparison, the CPT 93 modifier can be attached to theoretically any billing code that is permitted under law, thus allowing for more precise tracking and more useful follow-up research. Prior to the introduction of the CPT 93 modifier, there were seldom CPT codes that could be used to represent audio-only telehealth for specific services. Even though audio-only telehealth has been delivered at high rates, states have only been able to use temporary or workaround solutions to bill for audio-only services. For example, the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) Level II code for crisis response (CR) has been used by some states to support audio-only services during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the two and a half years since the pandemic began, however, the use of audio-only to provide health services has become normalized and may in fact now be expected by Medicaid providers and beneficiaries—a reality for which the CR code, and its temporary application, was not designed. The CPT 93 solves this challenge on a national scale. Another prior attempt to capture audio-only telehealth was the CPT modifier 95 that only indicated a telehealth service and did not differentiate between audio-only and audio-visual care. HCPCS Level II code “G0” has also been used; however, it indicates a telehealth service for diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment specific to symptoms of an acute stroke. Furthermore, CPT code 99401 can be used to reflect counseling services that may be provided via audio-only care; however, this code failed to capture all the nuance of the amount of time of care was delivered. At the end of the COVID-19 PHE, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) plans to add the “FQ” modifier on claims for HCPCS code G2080 for counseling and therapy provided using audio-only telecommunications. The HCPCS G2080 code refers to when one provides therapy services that largely exceed the amount listed in the patient’s individualized treatment plan for medication assisted treatment for opioid use disorder. This modifier exists solely for CMS’s Opioid Treatment Program and fails to account for other indications for audio-only telehealth. Creating a CPT modifier that is applicable to all service types simplifies the codification and measurement of audio-only care across all payer types. Conduct More Research On Audio-Only Telehealth Researchers, provider organizations, and policy makers must investigate and ensure that audio-only telehealth drives strong clinical outcomes. Telephone-focused care has been an important part of primary care; however, much of it was after hours, unmeasured, and not reimbursed. There is strong evidence on audio-only telehealth’s efficacy in prenatal visits and insomnia, for example. A randomized clinical control trial in a patient population of the Kaiser Permanente Washington system received audio-only cognitive behavioral therapy through the telephone demonstrated a significant benefit in improving sleep, fatigue, and osteoarthritis-associated pain. A cohort study amongst pregnant women in the Parkland Health System in Texas found that audio-only perinatal visits were not associated with changes in perinatal outcomes when compared to in-person visits in a vulnerable population. While these data are encouraging, they are sparse. Measurement of a CPT modifier may streamline the research methods used in these studies. Researchers must continue to investigate the efficacy of specific therapies when delivered via audio-only modalities. While audio-only telehealth solves several problems in health care, there are also several risks such as its potential use for inappropriate clinical indications and the risk that some may see an opportunity to overbill. An audio-only modifier—and therefore a more granular characterization of telehealth modalities—may help assuage concerns about fraud, waste, and abuse, removing existing ambiguity about the impact of different telehealth modalities on outcomes. We also know that the quality and value of these delivery modalities may vary according to the different demographics being served, including factors such as age, insurance status, payer, income, and region, among many others. Such modalities will likely vary between acuity of patient’s indication for care. Only by studying these differences amongst modalities and the populations served, can we ensure that the care delivered is equitable and valuable. Implementing the 93 modifier is a vital step toward enabling health services researchers to urgently pursue research questions that inform evidence-based policy about the best use of audio-only telehealth—especially amongst the Medicaid population. It is also essential to ensuring that the growth of audio-only health care does not create a two-tiered system between private insurance and Medicaid. For example, audio-only care may in fact be lower quality or lower value compared to audiovisual care or in-person care—although, further investigation is necessary to understand these differences. Considering that audio-only care helps remove barriers to care for underresourced patient populations, inappropriate use of audio-only care may further exacerbate the already large inequities in health care—a concern raised by both clinicians and patients. This reliance on audio-only care may also hamstring innovations that can improve the quality and access to audiovisual telehealth or in-person care. Clearly, there are legitimate concerns about the equity of audio-only health. To resolve them, more precise data and extensive investigations are necessary: Both of which will be enabled by the implementation of the CPT 93 modifier. An Opportunity For Action The new audio-only CPT 93 modifier provides meaningful potential benefits to combat barriers to care that were compounded during the COVID-19 pandemic. The new code creates a potent opportunity for conducting rigorous research into audio-only telehealth to inform federal- and state-level policy around equitable telehealth delivery. But to make the most of this opportunity, regulators, payers, providers, and researchers must take steps to increase adoption and evaluation of the audio-only modifier. To catalyze this work, large health systems should consider leading the adoption of the CPT 93 modifier while also encouraging local private providers to do the same. Payers and purchasers should consider requiring modifier submission, a step that would also facilitate further research into the field with minimal additional administrative burden on providers. Federal health agencies have a role as well. For example, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) may increase awareness of the modifiers amongst affiliated researchers or those who use AHRQ databases while the Health Resources and Services Agency may require community health centers they fund to use the new modifier. Authors’ Note The authors would like to thank Dr. John Morgan and Amanda Brodt for their contributions to preparing this paper. Dr. Ostrovsky is an investor in the following companies, some of which provide telehealth services: https://www.socialinnovationventures.com . However, there are no direct conflicts of interest. See original article: https://www.healthaffairs.org/content/forefront/new-coding-modifier-offers-opportunity-investigate-audio-only-telehealth#.Y3feKa9vXhA.twitter < 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 >

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 >

Congress’ Last Minute Holiday Gift to Telehealth: The Omnibus Budget for FY 2023 Has Passed! CCHP December 23, 2022 Earlier today, Congress passed HR 2617, The Performance Enhancement Reform Act, the omnibus budget for FY 2023. HR 2617 includes several provisions impacting telehealth, including extending some of the telehealth COVID-19 telehealth flexibilities. In the budget bill passed for FY 2022, Congress had included a 151-day extension after the end of the public health emergency (PHE) for some COVID-19 telehealth flexibilities. However, with the passage of HR 2617, these flexibilities will now last until December 31, 2024. The main telehealth provisions in the bill include: For Medicare: Some telehealth flexibilities in Medicare are extended to December 31, 2024. These flexibilities include: temporary suspension of the geographic site requirement, continuing to allow the home as an eligible originating site, allowing certain providers, including FQHCs and RHCs to continue to be eligible telehealth providers during this period, delaying the in-person mental health visit requirement for services that take place when the patient is not in a geographically eligible location or at home that is found in non-pandemic telehealth policies, and continuing to allow audio-only to be used to provide some services. A study on telehealth and Medicare program integrity that will include a medical record review of claims from January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2024. Elements to be examined include the types of services furnished, where they were furnished, and duration of services. For the VA: Development of a strategic plan to ensure effectiveness of telehealth delivered by the VA to their enrollees. Other Items: Extension of safe harbor for absence of deductible for telehealth in health savings accounts for another 2 years (for plans after December 31, 2022 and before January 1, 2025). President Biden is expected to sign the bill which will allow telehealth providers and patients to have a little more clarity on the end date of federal telehealth provisions. For more information read HR 2617 in its entirety. Wishing a wonderful holiday season and a happy new year to all! See original article: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/congress-last-minute-holiday-gift-to-telehealth-the-omnibus-budget-for-fy-2023-has-passed < Previous News Next News >

Membership Benefits Welcome to the New Mexico Telehealth Alliance! This members section contains exclusive content and is available to subscribed members. For information on membership benefits, please select an option below. If you're already a member, please log-in to access your exclusive content. Click here to download NMTHA virtual backgrounds (ZOOM and Google Meets compatible). Membership Benefits Learn more New Member Log-in Guide Download Add/Change Member Guide Download

Is telemedicine an answer to physician burnout and staffing shortages? Bill Siwicki May 24, 2022 A physician who works full time via telehealth – and in brick-and-mortar ERs on the side – discusses the benefits to herself and the industry. With the huge initial swell in the use of virtual care in the rearview mirror, many industry experts – from health plans to big tech and practicing clinicians – are considering whether a doubling down on telehealth is just what the doctor ordered for the future of patient care. Many clinicians are hungry for new opportunities that allow them to continue to serve patients without dealing with long-standing administrative burdens and the aftermath of burnout from COVID-19 in their hospitals, health systems and doctor's offices. With too many clinicians continuing to stress that they've lost passion in their careers and considering quitting their jobs altogether, experts say change is needed. The healthcare industry can't afford to lose these highly skilled clinical workers to other industries. On this note, Healthcare IT News interviewed Dr. Pooja Aysola, a practicing emergency department clinician in Boston and senior director of clinical operations at Wheel, a virtual care company. She talks about physicians' newfound familiarity with telehealth and what it means for the future, the possibility of physicians working full time in telemedicine, and how virtual care can help with staffing shortages in healthcare. Q. With the massive uptake in telemedicine during the past two years of the pandemic, clinicians have grown accustomed to delivering care virtually. What do you think this familiarity means for clinicians moving forward? A. I hadn't ever considered a career in virtual care until a few months into the pandemic. I was working in an emergency room in Boston when my shifts were cut after the hospital rolled back elective procedures. I started working in telemedicine as a temporary solution, but I ended up loving the flexibility to see patients at home and on my own schedule. I also quickly realized I didn't have to be in the same room as my patients to deliver great care. I can treat conditions such as UTIs through a screen and provide immediate value to my patients. I'm not alone in my sudden pivot from virtual-care skeptic to virtual-care advocate. Two in three clinicians now say treating patients in virtual only or hybrid care settings best fits their lifestyle, despite a significant lack of interest in telehealth before the pandemic. I'm hopeful this new trend will allow more clinicians to create career paths that work for them, rather than against them. Clinicians should have the flexibility to decide when they want to work, where they want to work, and how they want to work. If we're moving toward a hybrid care model, then we should enable clinicians to adopt hybrid careers, if that's what works best for them. In medical school, we're taught there's only one track you can follow: in-person care. But that's not the case anymore. I want every doctor and nurse to feel empowered to follow the career path that works best for them. Q. You seem to suggest that physicians looking for a change, perhaps due to burnout, can switch to telehealth full time. What would a move to virtual care look like for a physician? A. The past few years have been incredibly tough for clinicians. Burnout, frustration and fatigue are some of the many challenges facing clinicians today. Recent data shows more than half of clinicians have lost passion for their careers because of stress – and close to half believe burnout is the biggest threat to patient care today. Working in virtual care was a less-than-traditional career path before the pandemic. But now, many clinicians are considering working in virtual care to help combat burnout and increase flexibility. A move to virtual care will look different for everyone. For example, some clinicians enjoy having a set schedule each week to see patients. Others enjoy having more flexibility, where they can easily sign on after dropping their kids off at school, sign off before running an errand, or even split their time between virtual and in-person care. At Wheel, more than half of clinicians still work in a brick-and-mortar setting. One of our clinicians currently is driving around the country with her partner in an RV. She customizes her schedule based on her travel plans that day. She can see patients in the morning and go for a hike in the afternoon, or spend a few hours on the road before pulling over and seeing patients in the afternoon. Clinicians interested in telehealth should look for opportunities that prioritize and personalize their experience as clinicians. Some specific factors to consider include: What kind of electronic health record does the company use? And was the EHR created with your experience in mind? Do they offer ongoing training? And provide resources on important topics, such as "webside" manner and guidance on managing state licenses? Do they have a robust clinical quality program in place? How do they provide feedback on quality of care? Q. How can telehealth help with the staffing shortage in healthcare? A. Our current clinician staffing shortage is a national crisis. And it's only expected to get worse. According to an Elsevier study, almost half of U.S. clinicians plan to leave their jobs within the next few years. I've seen firsthand the impact shortages are having on clinician burnout and patient care. And I firmly believe this is a crisis that the entire industry must address. Ensuring clinicians feel encouraged to explore careers in virtual care, if that's what works best for them, is one of many steps to take. Another way for telehealth to help address staffing shortages is by powering the transition to what we call "virtual-first care." With virtual-first care, patients can start their care journey with telemedicine. By leaning on technology, healthcare organizations can more easily triage the patient's care needs and determine the best care setting – virtual, in-person or hybrid care. This is a more efficient way to approach care delivery while simultaneously increasing access to care. While telehealth alone is not the only solution, it is one of many steps we can take to help address staffing shortages and help ensure timely patient access to 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/telemedicine-answer-physician-burnout-and-staffing-shortages < Previous News Next News >

A Decade of Telehealth Policy: A New Report From CCHP Mei Kwong- Center for Connected Health Policy August 2022 Ten years ago, in the early months of 2012, the Center for Connected Health Policy (CCHP) faced a decision of potentially great significance. The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Federal Office of Rural Health Policy (FORPH) Office for the Advancement of Telehealth (OAT) had released a Funding Opportunity Announcement for their Telehealth Resource Center Grant Program and the incumbent contractor for the National Telehealth Resource Center for Policy (NTRC-P) contract would not be reapplying. After weighing the pros and cons of acting as the NTRC-P, CCHP decided to take the plunge and applied. On September 1, 2012, CCHP officially started its work as the federally designated National Telehealth Policy Resource Center and have been serving that role for the past decade. To mark CCHP’s ten-year anniversary as the NTRC-P, we are releasing a look back on telehealth policy in the United States. For the past decade, CCHP has tracked and followed policy development for all 51 jurisdictions in the United States (District of Columbia included) as well as at the federal level providing us with the unique opportunity to observe and study the development of telehealth policy in the United States on both the state and federal levels. This past decade also happens to be the period that encompasses some of the most significant telehealth policy developments seen thus far in the United States. The report is not intended to be an in-depth study on telehealth policy development and history as that could easily be an entire novel given the complexities and nuances that would need to be considered. The National Telehealth Resource Center for Policy Ten-Year Anniversary Report is intended to capture some of the highlights, significant changes, and environmental factors that have had an impact on telehealth policy development in the nation. Considering the increased interest in telehealth policy, CCHP believes this report also will be useful to provide context on how telehealth policy came to be where it is today, particularly for those who may be newer to the field. Additionally, the report is meant to be a celebration of the time CCHP has spent as the NTRC-P including the contributions the organization has made to the telehealth field. This report is dedicated to the memory of Mario Gutierrez, CCHP Executive Director from 2011-2017. Mario was the original visionary who decided in 2012 that CCHP should apply for the project. A special thank you must also be extended to CCHP staff, both past and present, who have truly been the engine that continues to drive the work of the organization forward. Special acknowledgment must be made of Laura Stanworth, Deputy Director, and Christine Calouro, Senior Policy Associate, both who have been with CCHP from the beginning of its role as the NTRC-P and who, along with myself, have seen this past decade of telehealth policy development, including producing all information and navigating CCHP through those first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope you will enjoy this report and find the information useful. CCHP looks forward to continuing on the ever evolving telehealth policy journey with all of you. See full report: https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/a-decade-of-telehealth-policy-our-10-year-anniversary-report < Previous News Next News >

Permanent Pay, Originating Site Policies Boost Access to Virtual Addiction Services Victoria Bailey Dec. 29, 2021 By making temporary reimbursement and site-originating policies permanent, legislators could help increase access to virtual opioid use disorder treatment, according to a new report. December 20, 2021 - Lawmakers have the power to solidify access to virtual opioid use disorder treatment by introducing policies that ensure reimbursement parity, solidify audio-only telehealth coverage, and expand the list of eligible originating sites, according to an issue brief from the Pew Charitable Trusts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth proved to be a successful care modality for delivering opioid use disorder treatment to individuals across the country. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services (SAMHSA) lifted their restrictions and allowed buprenorphine prescribers to initiate medication treatment via telehealth without requiring an in-person visit first. However, these regulations are temporary and are set to expire once the public health emergency ends. In order to ensure access to virtual opioid use disorder treatment, state Medicaid agencies and policymakers should make these and other telehealth regulations permanent, Pew said. Legislatures should require public and private payers to reimburse providers for all opioid use disorder treatment services delivered via telehealth, including clinical assessments, prescriptions, medication management, and counseling sessions. Additionally, ensuring reimbursement for a variety of providers — including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and mental health professionals — could help solidify the virtual treatment process. According to Pew, states that offered coverage for buprenorphine prescribing via telehealth saw positive patient outcomes that were similar to in-person services. Policymakers should also establish payment parity between telehealth and in-person opioid use disorder treatment services under public and private payers alike. “Without assurances of sufficient reimbursement rates, providers may be unwilling to invest in telehealth infrastructure for their practices, or they may find it infeasible to increase the use of telehealth for OUD treatment,” researchers wrote in the brief. Medicaid programs can ensure reimbursement parity for telehealth services without submitting a plan amendment to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Thirty-eight states and Washington D.C. have established payment parity for certain telehealth services, but not all programs include opioid use disorder services in their provisions. Originating-site restrictions must also be addressed, Pew researchers said. Some states allow patients to use telehealth but only from certain clinics that can serve as an originating site. By expanding the list of eligible originating sites to include the patient’s home, policymakers could make accessing virtual care more convenient for individuals. Medicare currently allows individuals to receive telehealth-based opioid use disorder treatment from their homes, according to the brief. Past studies have shown that patients can initiate buprenorphine safely and successfully while remaining in their homes. In addition, patients seemed to prefer receiving treatment from home. Further, Medicaid programs should make audio-only telehealth policies permanent to facilitate access to virtual care, Pew researchers recommended. Audio-only coverage is set to expire when the public health emergency ends. Ensuring that providers receive reimbursement for audio-only opioid use disorder services may help address care disparities and benefit underserved communities that tend to use the care modality most often, including Black and Hispanic populations, individuals with limited English proficiency, and communities with inadequate broadband access. At least 15 Medicaid programs offer reimbursement for audio-only telehealth as of February, but some states only provide coverage for certain services, the brief noted. Finally, Pew researchers recommended that policymakers allow correctional settings to offer telehealth-based opioid treatment. Jails and prisons typically allow incarcerated individuals to receive healthcare via telehealth but the option to receive virtual opioid use disorder treatment is far less common, the brief stated. If states allocated funding to these institutions, they could invest in the necessary telehealth resources to establish virtual opioid treatment services. A few correctional facilities, including one in Minnesota and one in Massachusetts, currently offer buprenorphine treatment, counseling sessions, and clinical assessments through telehealth. Even with these policy changes, states may face additional barriers to offering virtual opioid treatment services including a lack of funding for infrastructure and poor broadband access. Pew researchers suggested that states consider partnering with the National Consortium of Telehealth Resource Centers to receive assistance with launching a telehealth program. Additionally, state and local governments can leverage funding from the American Rescue Plan Act to invest in expanding internet access to communities that need it. https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/permanent-pay-originating-site-policies-boost-access-to-virtual-addiction-services < 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 >

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