Resources & Reports

While some very important questions regarding the future of temporary waivers on telehealth policies in Medicare, as well as the prescribing of controlled substances, continue to be unanswered, there have been some new developments in the past few weeks related to federal telehealth policy. Some of the recent discussions in Congress as well as actions by the Biden Administration may provide some insight on the fate of some of these temporary telehealth policies.

CCHP’s March Newsletter is here! This month’s topics include – Telehealth Toolkit Update: Navigating Policies and Best Practices for Medicaid and CHIP Services; Telehealth Advocates Alert DEA to Prescription Challenges for Controlled Substances; CMS Memo Addresses Texting Patient Orders and Compliance Concerns for Hospitals and CAHs; Senate Hearing on AI Discusses Striking a Balance between Regulation vs. Innovation; IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:  Updated CMS Telehealth Factsheet & Noridian Addresses Telehealth Claims Issue with POS 10; Latest Policy Developments in CCHP’s Telehealth Policy Finder and Policy Trends Map; Unlocking the Potential of Remote Patient Monitoring in Cancer Care; IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:  Dive into Telehealth Policy with CCHP Executive Director, Mei Kwong!

Last month the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released an updated Telehealth Services Medicare Learning Network (MLN) Fact Sheet reflecting new information for 2024. Most of the guidance remains unchanged and updates largely focus around incorporating already adopted policies from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (CAA 2023) and CY 2024 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) Final Rule. However, the document serves to assist providers struggling to keep up with shifting billing rules and offers the potential to clarify outstanding reimbursement issues as well as provide a reminder of current Medicare telehealth policies.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth research frequently focused on its use to access mental and behavioral health services, since the services were the most commonly considered as appropriate to receive virtually rather than in-person. As attention to and demand for telemental health access increased during the pandemic, additional studies have been released showing both trends and areas for future research as well as creating new policy. For instance, determining how many mental health clinicians have shifted their practices post-pandemic to primarily virtual, and how that trend interplays with federal and state policies requiring in-person visits. Additionally, with a shortage of mental health providers in many areas of the country, telehealth is a key tool to increase access to needed health care providers. However, a variety of other policy issues such as lack of payer reimbursement and digital equity continue to be challenges and limit telehealth’s ability to fully address access.

Two new reports have recently been released discussing states with licensure exemptions or registration processes specific to the use of telehealth by out-of-state providers. One report, titled, In 30 states you can’t use telehealth with out-of-state doctors, was released by the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), which also is the organization that filed the lawsuit alleging New Jersey’s licensure laws are unconstitutional which CCHP discussed in detail within its January 23^rd Newsletter. Additionally, a second report, issued by the Cicero Institute titled, The third annual telehealth innovation report, highlights 27 states that have barriers to cross-state-line telehealth. The discrepancies between the two reports are largely based on different definitions and interpretations of existing laws, demonstrating how confusing navigating telehealth across state lines can be for both providers and patients. In addition, the differences present the importance of reviewing each law directly in order to truly understand what the policies both require and allow in the various circumstances that arise in terms of virtual medical care.