For the Latest Information on COVID-19 in the USA, see:
Covid-19 Healthcare Coalition - https://c19hcc.org/
Centers for Disease Control & Prevention - https://www.cdc.gov/
Health and Human Services - https://www.hhs.gov/
Remote Patient Monitoring in Chronic Care Management: A Practitioner’s Experience using RPM to Increase Patient Adherence and Improve Patient Outcomes
Andrew Mills, BBA1; Brad Guest, MBA, JD2
1Chief Executive Officer, CareTrack, Inc., Carrollton, Georgia, USA; 2Managing Member, Caliber Healthcare LLC, Bishop, Georgia.
Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has come a long way. Most people think of it as a relatively new development. In fact, RPM has been in use in the United States for over fifty years. Its first use was a collaboration between NASA and Kaiser Permanente. In the 1970s, they developed and implemented an RPM pilot serving the Tohono O’odham Indian Nation in southwest Arizona. NASA was interested in RPM’s potential for post-Apollo, long-duration manned space flight. Kaiser on the other hand was interested in its use in what we would now call population health. As you might guess, the program had many glitches and technological hurdles, but it ultimately worked. Kaiser physicians monitored basic vital signs and interacted with tribal members through television signals.
Since then, RPM has continued to advance and now plays a key role in primary care and virtually all sub-specialties. Here we discuss another important application that is showing great promise: chronic care management (CCM). We are seeing tangible proof of its ability to impact the Triple Aim of improving quality for the patient, reducing cost, and making populations healthier. We find that two trends are driving increased adoption of RPM: COVID and the resulting increase in out-of-office care1 and the continuing embrace of value-based care by providers, private payers, and governments.2
COVID-19 jolted the steady but moderate growth rate that the industry posted over the prior decade. Faced with new and unexpected challenges, consumer adoption increased dramatically in response to COVID. Prior to the epidemic, roughly 11% of U.S. consumers used telehealth. Now 45% to 50% of consumers have done so in order to replace cancelled, in-person appointments.1 Visit numbers bear this out. During the first quarter of 2020, the number of telehealth visits increased 50%, compared with the same period in 2019. There was also a 154% increase in visits noted in early 2020, compared with the same period in 2019.
Conversely, during the same time periods, emergency department visits decreased substantially.2 As infections abated, telehealth visits declined slightly. Yet, they are still far above pre-COVID levels. This suggests the reality of a long-term and durable change in attitudes of patients, providers, and payers.3
“At its heart, value-based care is premised on a belief that our health care system can be significantly improved by transforming care to lower prices and improve outcomes.”4 As evidence of its spread, there are now approximately 36.3 million people covered under Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs).4 This number has been relatively steady since 2018, after growing rapidly beginning around 2012. However, in the last 12 to 18 months, a small number of organizations exited the market.4 Health systems spent significant time and financial resources building programs around their owned or affiliated ACOs. In 2020, approximately 40% of healthcare provider revenues were earned through alternative payment models.5
Our clients are responding to the challenge of value-based care, transforming what they do and finding ways to improve outcomes. For them this means being closer to their patients and more intimately involved in their care, over time. The focus is on improving patient adherence. Patient adherence means helping patients closely follow all aspects of their care plans between office visits. It also means collecting and analyzing clinical data so physicians can adjust care plans in an efficient and timely manner. That’s where RPM comes in, presents challenges and opportunities working with older patients.
RPM in Chronic Care Management
Remote patient monitoring refers to the technology and processes necessary to monitor health on an ongoing basis. Remote patient monitoring technology may include physiological monitoring (e.g., blood pressure, glucose, weight, and temperature), medication administration reminders or monitoring, diet and exercise tracking, falls monitoring, and tools to help patients cope with anxiety or depression. The process involves four distinct but interconnected layers:
In an effective chronic care RPM program, the management and monitoring layer acts as the central nervous system. It receives, organizes, and interprets clinical data and assembles it into actionable information for physicians and others in the patient’s care team. Real-time, actionable information is what makes RPM so effective. It allows physicians to adjust care plans and change visit intervals based on the most recent and relevant clinical data.
Remote Monitoring for Older Patients
Older patients present unique challenges. It is critical that older patients understand the role of the monitoring equipment and not be intimidated by it. The number of Americans ages 65 and older will more than double over the next 40 years, reaching 80 million in 2040. Additionally, the number of adults ages 85 and older will nearly quadruple between 2000 and 2040.6 The chronic disease challenge faced by this population will require an expanding set of resources to both monitor health conditions and use the data to improve adherence to treatment plans. To meet this challenge, we expect remote patient monitoring to become increasingly important.
Digital health literacy is one of the biggest barriers to patient engagement for senior populations. We found several things to be important in assessing and addressing digital literacy:
We learned the most important reason patients agree to enter RPM monitoring and (just as importantly) remain in the program. The key is if the patient understands the connection between the monitoring and their ultimate health. Patients who want their physicians to be up to date on their health tend to remain in the program and are attentive to the data they receive, as well. We found that this is particularly true for hypertension, where blood pressure readings are easy to understand and respond closely to changes in diet and exercise. In some cases, patients decline or drop-out programs due to co-pay/financial issues. Managed care plans vary in their terms for RPM, with some imposing no out-of-pocket cost. For Medicare beneficiaries, patients are subject to a 20% beneficiary copay, which is not waivable, but may be covered if a patient has supplemental coverage or Medicaid.
Within Medicare, RPM services can be billed in addition to CCM. This means that providers can bill both RPM CPT code 99457 and CCM CPT code 99490. CMS recognizes that the time and work analysis involved in furnishing RPM services complements CCM and other care management services. There is a 40-minute minimum monthly time requirement for billing these codes together, comprised of 20 minutes of RPM and 20 minutes of CCM.
Remote patient monitoring is playing an increasingly important role in CCM. Physicians and health systems are finding that their ability to manage population health depends on the extent and availability of up-to-date patient data. Given recent advancements in technology and cultural acceptance of digital devices, patients are now able and willing to adopt a broad array of monitoring technology. This presents a juncture point from past practice where RPM was often focused on isolated populations and used for shorter duration. Older populations deserve special consideration. They are often those who can benefit the most, yet they present special challenges. We found that these challenges can be overcome by using pre-arranged kits of easy-to-use devices followed by a well-executed education and communication plan. Providers and others in the field of CCM and population health should carefully consider how this technology can improve the quality and effectiveness of their care management programs.
Digital Health Equity in Nigeria
Idris Umarfarouq, PharmD;1 Bryan T. Arkwright, MHA2
Affilations: 1Cromford Health 2Chief Research Officer, Cromford Health, 3Adjunct Faculty, Wake Forest University School of Law ORCID ID: 0000-0001-5500-0700
Digital health plays a fundamental role in the growth or development of healthcare systems. However, there is a major dearth and gap of knowledge on the basics of digital health equity as a framework to help in the fair share of health and wellbeing for everyone in Nigeria. Here we present a basic overview of digital health equity. More particularly, we suggest increased partnerships with telecommunication companies utilizing digital health equity frameworks (DHEF) and encourage public and private organizations to fund investigation and research to propel digital health equity.
Health equity allows all to have access to the best healthcare amenities and expertise. With the advent of Covid in the past year, the WHO Africa Region member countries have implemented innovative and vast means to promote better health outcomes. Application of information and communication technology (ICT), audio enabled, and televideo enabled interactions are among the innovations implemented by the different WHO member countries to improve their health outcomes. The implementation of different technologies in the development of the healthcare system in Nigeria has contributed to the realization and actualization of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Universal Health Coverage (UHC) as well as other African countries. There has been a lack of attention to health equity in developing digital health solutions in Nigeria and other African countries, which contributes to the lack of growth in the healthcare system. There are different factors that limit health equity, and they include,
Determinants of health which include social, cultural, and economic determinants, contribute to the fair share of health amenities and expertise.
According to a survey by WHO on eHealth, funding for digital health for countries in Africa varies, with an estimated 72% of the funding provided by external donors. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU’s) helps provide opportunities for Nigerian governmental systems to jointly negotiate digital health prices through national economic experts, thereby increasing their bargaining power while lowering the cost of digital health in Nigeria.
The donor alignment principle was launched at the world health summit in Berlin on 16th October 2018. Digital Investment Principle is an essential framework that helps investors align their investments to country digital health strategies.
Top Global Digital Health Investors are:
The digital equity framework was created to consider health equity factors in the delivery of digital health services, and it encompasses the digital health determinants. Digital health determinants impact a patients’ chances of receiving a quality of care that is person-centered, safe, timely, effective, and efficient.
The framework includes:
There is an increase in life expectancy, but unequally, also there is a wide gap between the people with best and the worst wellbeing. These gaps are unjust and avoidable. Digital health equity can be achieved by the absence of unfair and avoidable differences in health among population groups defined socially, economically, demographically, or geographically.
Future Implications of Telehealth in the Post-COVID World
Sujatha Alla1, Vijay Kumar Chattu2*
Affiliations: 1Engineering Management and Systems Engineering, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA. ORCID ID: 0000-0003-2824-4528; 2*Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. ORCID ID: 0000-0001-9840-8335
The recent global pandemic forced telehealth to play a greater role in global healthcare delivery due to limited healthcare accessibility. The advent of innovative communication technologies has made it easier for patients to get services like health assessment, diagnosis, interventions, supervision, and information remotely. Digital imaging, decision support software, virtual reality, machine learning for error reduction, Internet of Things (IoT) such as wearable sensors, assistive robots, advances in data management (tracking, transmission, and storage), real-time analytics or store-and-forward, are some of the dynamic technologies that provide strong evidence-based support to scalable and sustainable telehealth programs.
Telehealth has become increasingly relevant as global healthcare needs have become overwhelmed by significant increases in the global level of chronic diseases  and the insufficient number of healthcare professionals and medical facilities, especially with an increase in aging people. Some studies that compared telehealth to traditional outpatient care recorded savings estimates ranging from 17% to 75%. In a study on 17,025 US Veterans, the use of telehealth services resulted in a 25% reduction in hospital length of stay, a 19% reduction in hospital admissions, and a mean satisfaction score rating of 86%, all at the cost of US $1600 per patient per annum . In the European Union, it is estimated that chronic illness is a factor in 87% of all deaths . The literature also reported the benefits of Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) with decreased hospitalizations, improved patient compliance with treatment plans, improved patient satisfaction with health services, and improved quality of life .
In 2011, World Health Organization (WHO) launched a policy called “Health 2020” to achieve the highest level of health among European countries . Based on this, Denmark designed a national strategy for digitalization of the Danish public sector by 2020, focusing on implementing telehealth at scale, improving personalized telehealth, and quality of life for patients and citizens within the healthcare and social sectors. However, patients’ acceptance is not sufficient for integrating telehealth, and it still continues to be the fall-back option to the traditional healthcare services.
A three-round study conducted by the CDC on telemedicine access and use during July 2020, Aug 2020, and May 2021, revealed that telehealth services used were highest during the first two rounds, but the trend significantly decreased by May 2021 as many countries managed to get vaccines and control COVID by that time . Some organizational reasons are patient privacy regulations (HIPAA rules), payment parities, billing problems, and medical license jurisdictions, There ar also problems with real-time access to patient data, and unstructured change management policies.
To integrate telehealth into general healthcare, aspects such as human-technology interaction, social factors, strategy development, needs assessment, readiness assessment, business case/plan development, change management, constant evaluation is needed . For example, in the United States, the Medicare plan does not recognize a patient’s home as a reimbursable originating site of care . Hence integration may require challenging adjustment by following systems engineering approaches to healthcare organizational design such as technical and human requirements, adjusting work processes, and streamlining various departments.
Given the need for telehealth, it is increasingly important to develop a strong evidence base of successful and innovative telehealth solutions by developing a robust framework for rigorous evaluation of the implication of emerging telehealth technologies and rapidly adapting best practices through global collaboration.
Measuring the Early Impact Of COVID-19 for Future Market and Policy Corrections in the United States
Tory Cenaj, Publisher, TMT
The landmark COVID-19 Telehealth Impact Study published in TMT provides a view into the explosive implementation and scaled use of telehealth services during the first year (2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. Now that most households in the United States are familiar with the term, the way patients chose to interface with health providers has marked a future forward change.
The ‘COVID-19 Telehealth Impact Study’, conducted by the COVID-19 Healthcare Coalition (1), is based on 2 billion US healthcare claims records (provided by Change Healthcare), as well as on surveys from physicians and patients on the current state of virtual care, along with recommendations for right sizing the cost of care. It is a first step in developing a sustainable and fair market plan, in which telehealth can flourish as the US health system evolves.
Topline results moving telehealth squarely into the 21st century for quality care delivery are given below:
To place telehealth’s recent trajectory in full view, the study revealed:
The challenges we still face in creating a fair, equitable, accessible, robust, and resilient market to leverage discovery, technology, entrepreneurism, and investment appropriately in the United States include credentialing, reimbursement, interoperability, and parity.
Regulators must clear these hurdles for efficient, trustworthy, safe, and effective market growth for multidisciplinary stakeholders and users. Roll backs that stifled progress in the past are resurfacing for pre-pandemic state licensing restrictions for telehealth. If it made practical sense during the height of the pandemic to increase patient access to care, why doesn't it make sense now?
If survey providers indicated uncertainty about reimbursement and if new risks of liability are barriers to continued use of telehealth services, why aren’t we permanently lifting barriers?
And what about cost?
Although there were several study limitations, such as outcomes data, querying patients who were (mostly) white females receiving telehealth services, and not including Medicare and Medicaid indemnity claims, the authors suggest research gaps, including studies for the financial impact of telehealth, be conducted by other organizations. Clearly, the recent adoption of telehealth speaks to its value when regulatory obstacles are cleared and all states operate in unison.
While the authors were delicate in presenting factual study results and recommendations throughout, the overall study provides a most perfect backdrop for the five ‘must haves’ posed for telehealth to be integrated into US healthcare system. They are as follows:
To read the research article in its entirety in Telehealth and Medicine Today, open access journal, click here.
Study authors are affiliated with the following organizations: MITRE Corporation, Mayo Clinic, Atrius Health, Massachusetts Health Quality Partners, Always Health Partners, Digital Medical Society, Change Healthcare, and Harvard Medical School. The COVID-19 Healthcare Coalition is a private sector-led response that brings together healthcare organizations, technology firms, nonprofits, academia, and startups to preserve the healthcare delivery system and help protect the US populations. To learn more, go to https://c19hcc.org
Telehealth Strategic Imperatives for Meeting Lifelong Consumer Trust and Care
Tory Cenaj, Publisher, TMT
The pandemic has exponentially accelerated the adoption of virtual care and heightened consumer expectation leading health systems to reimagine their role in the sector. Adopting virtual care has empowered health systems to move beyond siloed applications to a more comprehensive, whole-person approach that consumers need across their healthcare journey.
This opens new strategic opportunities in the virtual care market for innovators, digital health stakeholders and health systems to play an integral role in the “consumer circle of trust”. Many consumers now expect a digital option where expectations have changed forever. To build a better healthcare system, consumer expectations for healthcare must be met where quality care can be delivered virtually too!
The market will be able to accommodate better care for the consumer at a better price point ensuring a better experience with appropriate regulation. As a result, health systems can take on risk and create new value systems. Teladoc, for example, has a vision beyond large payers and employers and includes hospitals and health systems, but how does ROI factor into the equation for urgent care, chronic care, and preventive care in value-based care?
The opportunity that virtual care presents is the future of consumerism in healthcare includes big tech companies, retailers, health plans, and NewCos disintermediating care delivery. There is tremendous opportunity for a health system to maximize the trust they have earned and established locally in the community, especially if investing in virtual care – and it pays for itself. Many health systems start with their own employees. ROI has been reported as high as three times the investment in the first year of launching virtual programs for chronic condition management alone.
In a fee for value world, opportunities shift to obtaining data to understand where and how to fill gaps and affect behavior change. Risk is rewarded with data insights and the ability to affect behavior change to enable healthy habits, lifestyles and enjoyment of a healthier life overall. The prototype for success is to make adjustments through predictive analytics, in real time, to meet consumers where they are.
If there are not enough primary care doctors for in-person visits and the concept of whole person care appears to resonate with many, this can be the way more virtual engagement benefits both consumer and health systems. The challenge is transitioning from fragmented products to an integrated platform where simple personalized data driven experiences are realized. Health systems are integrating whole person and virtual care with physical care across the health continuum.
Although most data should be contained in an EMR, much occurs outside the EMR. The EMR is an important foundational component, but that could limit the consumer experience. We should look beyond the EMR to capture “whole person” data.
In addition, how do we find physicians – the right physicians for the right care? Can we eliminate traditional geographic boundaries that have restricted access to a specialist into an opportunity to accelerate access to care and improve quality with newly created “Clinical Centers of Excellence” and consults on cases in rural communities?
From a technology and staff perspective, if we expect 20% of care will be conducted online hereon, what are the strategic priorities and imperatives for business? How will value based care arrangements focus on consumerism and growth strategies? How do you expand into other markets and do so without a brick and mortar footprint? It's time to reimagine how to address those priorities including profitability at government rates. How do you deliver care and democratize access to care underserved populations? What is the purpose built platform for interoperability, scalability and clinical workflows to enable a personalized consumer experience across the entire continuum of care? Opportunities have never been greater for providers and organizations to reinvent themselves because of what's possible with virtual models of care.
To glean more and listen to the new TMT “Unscripted” Podcast Series on “The Path Forward for Whole-Person Virtual Care,” featuring Bruce Brandes, Senior Vice President of Consumer Centered Virtual Care, Teladoc Health and Dr. Lyle Berkowitz, CEO of Back9 Healthcare Consulting and Editor-in-Chief of Telehealth and Medicine Today please visit https://telehealthandmedicinetoday.com/index.php/journal
Listen to Joe DeVivo, President, Hospital and Health Systems, Teladoc Health, ConV2X 2020 Keynote address entitles “Democratizing Healthcare: Accelerating Virtual Care Adoption to Transform Care Delivery,” at https://conv2xsymposium.com
Next Steps for Chronic Illness Care After the Taskforce on Telehealth Policy (TTP) Report
Trisha Kaundinya, BS, MD/MPH candidate;1 Rishi Agrawal, MD, MPH2
Affiliations: 1Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine; 2Associate Professor of Pediatrics (Hospital-based Medicine), Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine
Telehealth experienced rapid adoption during the Covid-19 pandemic. Hence, the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA), the Alliance for Connected Care, and the American Telemedicine Association (ATA) created a task force on telehealth policy (TTP) to elucidate its role post-pandemic. TTP identified no care overutilization and fewer no-shows to appointments in analyzing preliminary pandemic data, which were primary concerns regarding telehealth. Cost-related problems also caused resistance towards a telehealth transition, but TTP identified promising cost reduction mechanisms in telehealth through more transitional care management and lowered skilled nursing transfers.1 These findings are encouraging, but to leverage them in our health system, we must address telehealth specifically in the chronic illness population.
The TTP report already addresses patients with chronic illnesses in some ways. For example, concerning data flow, TTP championed remote patient monitoring to improve patient autonomy and reduce strain on caregivers. They proposed a pilot virtual medical home and Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resource (FHIR) shared care plan, which benefits those with routine and regular follow-up requirements.
TTP also advocated to remove originating site requirements, permit audio-only telehealth when it has proven to be useful, and consider technological access as a barrier to telehealth use—challenges which are all pronounced in the chronic illness population.2
Investment in Chronic Illnesses
Many existing initiatives for telehealth administration and reimbursement support episodic care that accountable care organizations (ACOs) manage, but those with chronic illnesses are perhaps best positioned to benefit from all that a telehealth transition can offer. Currently, almost one-half of the population has at least one chronic illness, and nearly 60% of all emergency department (ED) visits are for people with at least one chronic condition.3 There is currently an apparent mismatch between the CDC’s budget for chronic illness prevention, around $4 per person per year, and our spending on those with one or more chronic illnesses, which is about $8,000 per person per year.4
This mismatch coupled with an increased incidence of chronic illnesses means more preventable deaths and increased disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). It also means high costs when care for chronic illnesses is improper: A study found that fragmented care for chronic illnesses increased average care management costs by almost $5,000 over three years.5 Racial, geographic, and socioeconomic disparities in access to care and care outcomes are also most pronounced in the chronic illness population. From all of these perspectives, telehealth has the potential to revolutionize chronic illness care.
Instead of acute episodes that mandate brief in-person evaluation, effective chronic illness management requires a longitudinally connected care team. Telehealth in the form of RPM has shown to be useful. RPM is associated with reduced hospital admissions, nursing home admissions, ED visits, and improved preventative care use.6 The epicenter of chronic illness is moving away from the clinic and into the home, so the intersection of telehealth and home health care is a keystone to successful adaptation. Home health is also associated with reduced patient mortality and hospitalizations.7 The care continuity sought after in health systems managing patients with chronic illness depends on continued prescription access and thus discussion of how this changes in a virtual setting are also warranted.8
Given the great potential of telehealth to affect chronic illness management, we have articulated some of our telehealth policy and administration recommendations that follow TTP in this patient group.
Remote Patient Monitoring
Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is one of the most critical telehealth modalities for patients with chronic illnesses, especially as they get older. Many prefer to maintain their independence without requiring caregivers in facilities.
Earlier in the pandemic, an emergency rule expanded RPM use to new and established patients. This policy does not apply after the public health emergency ends according to the 2021 Physician Fee Schedule released by CMS. The rule needs to extend permanently post-pandemic.
Longitudinal care is one of the most significant challenges for patients with chronic illnesses, especially in rural areas with higher clinician turnover rates and lower numbers of providers. These patients would not be able to engage in telehealth and RPM in their onboarding to new providers without an in-person history and physical. The upfront convenience benefit of telehealth is lost when patients have to travel far and wait for care, and thus these patients are less likely to attend to their chronic illnesses. Patients with more complex chronic illnesses often cannot travel to establish a point of care with physicians in person and thus lose care connectivity from earlier clinicians.
The 2021 Fee Schedule mandates that in a 30-day time frame, providers can only bill once under CPT codes 99453 and 99454 for RPM independent of the number of devices patients use. Minimizing overuse of billing may be a driving incentive for this policy, but it disproportionately affects patients with multiple chronic illnesses who require many devices for their RPM. Even for patients with only one chronic illness, providers may need data from the patient’s pressure cuff, pulse oximeter, and glucose monitor, among other devices. Patients cannot be effectively managed by providers if only billed for RPM once a month. Inappropriate management of patients with multiple chronic illnesses has dire outcome and cost implications, so this requirement needs a revision that accounts for complex technology needs.9
The convenience afforded by telehealth goes hand-in-hand with the setting of home healthcare, which allows patients to sustain functionality and control over their activities of daily living. Home health has been associated with improved outcomes for patients with chronic illnesses long-term.7
Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, CMS has generated several telehealth coverage waivers for providers, but reimbursement for home health continues to trail behind. Home health aides (HHA) can legally provide telehealth services. However, these visits cannot replace in-person visits (they do not count towards the low-utilization payment adjustment (LUPA) threshold) and do not receive reimbursement as a virtual visit. HHA providers could engage in multiple mediums of telehealth to meet patient care needs, but they would still need to meet the patient in-person to bill codes covered by Medicare and meet CMS mandates. The incentive for providers to continue to provide telehealth would decrease if it is not covered. They would also be increasing Covid-19 transmission risk to an often immunocompromised population while meeting in-person expectations.
Improving coverage of telehealth for HHA has important uptake implications. One population whose engagement in telehealth long-term is limited is senior citizens, who comprise most patients for HHA. The current payment scheme disincentivizes telehealth use by HHA, when they could facilitate onboarding in a sizeable chronic illness population. Some states are relaxing rules around Medicaid coverage for HHA provision of telehealth. Thus a nationwide coverage expansion should be available for all states to opt into permanently post-pandemic.
Medication adherence is a challenge for patients with chronic illnesses, especially patients with several chronic illnesses and complex care regimens. Increased adherence in this population is associated with decreased hospitalizations and ER utilization. Telehealth has a critical role in this relationship, as it can lower the additional burden of long travel and waiting times included in adherence regimens.
Opioid Use Disorders(OUD):
The 2021 Physician Fee Schedule states that through Section 3 of the SUPORT Act, effective January 1st of 2021, prescription of Schedule II-V controlled substances under Medicare Part D can be done electronically. Still, they are soliciting commentary regarding any exceptions. Recent studies have reported that Medications for Addiction Treatment (MAT) programs for those with OUD which involved telehealth had better outcomes than their in-person counterparts and that telehealth was a primary reason that patients stayed on MAT.10
When it is clear that telehealth utilization in counseling as well as the e-prescribing process improves outcomes for those with OUD, there should be permanent lifts on controlled substance prescribing restrictions. The variability in states’ decisions to modify controlled substance prescribing laws that mandate in-person office evaluation should also be mitigated by CMS to federally and permanently enable telehealth in e-prescribing MAT even after the pandemic.
The only major exception should be to physicians who work in emergent settings, which would delay or decrease the chance of the patient’s prescription filling. Emergencies for patients with OUD are often outside of typical pharmacy hours, so e-prescriptions are not successful and require the patient to return and a new prescriber would have to engage in care. The existing prescript would have to be canceled as well. Patients with opioid use disorders on MAT are at high risk of relapses when there are delays in their access to medications. In acute emergency settings, they must acquire their medication in a timely fashion and thus in-person issuing of prescriptions could be more efficient.11
Overall, the TTP emphasizes integration instead of devising a new telehealth infrastructure in many of their recommendations related to patient safety, quality measurement, and data flow. There is also promising preliminary telehealth data from the pandemic, but the gateway to sustainable change is effective management of the multidimensional chronic illness population in America. This population contains some of the oldest, most socioeconomically disadvantaged, least technologically involved, and most vulnerable individuals in our health system.
With the involvement of CMS, the potential benefits of a more connected healthcare system, improved patient outcomes, and lower acute episode costs can be amplified. CMS should modify RPM fee rules for patients with chronic illnesses, expand their reimbursement criteria for telehealth by home health, and enable open-ended e-prescribing requirements for MAT except for acute care settings.
Under Recognition of the Potential Role of Telemedicine to Speed Data Dissemination and Communication in Veterinary Medicine in the Netherlands
Jack Gommers, Dongen, The Netherlands, email@example.com
Telemedicine can enhance information exchange in veterinary care. It provides triage, and, of particular importance for this post, timely follow-up regarding results of laboratory testing of livestock. Through the use of a case history, the focus here is on the author’s frustration with the current lack of remote communication and the potential role of telemedicine to speed sharing of essential information regarding risks to human and animal health.
In practice, a farmer maintains dialogue with the veterinarian who visits at least weekly. If an unknown disease strikes and analysis and diagnosis remain unclear, samples, often from dead animals, are sent to the laboratory for additional testing. In the Netherlands, this is conducted by the Animal Health Service, which sometimes forwards samples to accredited laboratories for further analysis. Based on test results, prescriptions are issued for collective treatment of the livestock or individual animals via oral or injected antibiotics.
If, as was experienced here, there is an unexpected lockdown by a governmental agency on suspicion of feed contamination, it is essential to know the diagnosis that made this action necessary. It must be remembered that family and children are at risk of unintentional contact with contamination. For rapid decision-making and to ensure public health, this is where telemedicine can be used for timely sharing of data.
In spite of the lockdown of my farm, gaining access to essential data was denied, for unclarified reasons. The Dutch government simply refused to forward laboratory results from tests carried out on my own animals. After asking the European Commission for guidance, they indicated that as a livestock farmer, I was certainly entitled to the test results of my farm. Yet, my government continued to refuse!
Despite zero tolerance required in European directives, the Dutch government tolerates finite concentrations of hormonal contaminants and pharmaceuticals in Dutch food, exported or not. According to the World Health Organization, chemical contamination might lead to acute poisoning or long-term diseases, such as cancer. Foodborne diseases might lead to long-lasting disability and even death.1
Another problem is mutation of bacterial and viral pathogens, e.g., coronaviruses.2
Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that mutate easily. It is known for decades that they can be present in pigs, chickens, and minks in areas of intensive livestock farming. SARS-CoV-2 is the most recent virus variant of the Corona type, with dozens of mink farms infected. Millions of these animals have been killed already, to eradicate this source of infection (also in Denmark, by the way). Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 is reported to a limited extent in pigs, chickens, dogs, and cats.
Another well-known zoonosis is the Q fever that flared in the province of North Brabant (in the south of the Netherlands) in 2007. It resulted in dozens of deaths and hundreds of people chronically ill for life. Q fever is a bacterial infectious disease that is mainly transmitted to humans by goats. Hundreds of thousands of goats were killed in the Netherlands because of this outbreak.
Officials of the European Commission pointed out to the Netherlands that all described risks to human health are unacceptable. In a parliamentary debate on this subject, with the responsible Ministers of Agriculture and Public Health, it was concluded that the Netherlands is indeed not following European guidelines 96/22 and 96/23 /EG for public health.
It is not my purpose to debate unacceptable policies at a political level here. As a farmer “in the field” my focus is on the health of my animals and the health of my family and others, by minimizing contamination risks. To this end, recognition of telemedicine is of utmost importance, as a valuable tool to facilitate the instantaneous provision of critical information and achieve the objectives advocated by the European Commission.
Transforming Health Care in the Wake of a Global Pandemic
Tory Cenaj, Publisher, Telehealth and Medicine Today
Some of the world’s top leaders and influencers in healthcare delivery transformation and health technologies, including blockchain in health tech and telehealth, converged at the 4th Annual ConVerge2Xcelerate (#CONV2X) 2020 Symposium held virtually from November 10th-12th, to exchange perspectives and solutions to shortfalls in global patient care exposed by COVID-19. The theme of this year’s symposium TMT hosted was “US-World Health Transformation.”
Impact of COVID-19 on health care
The global COVID-19 pandemic showed how vulnerable healthcare delivery is to patients around the world. Healthcare systems in every country have been challenged – not only in treating patients with coronavirus, but in trying to maintain optimal care for non-COVID patients at the same time.
As a result, new advances in digital health technologies, including telehealth, blockchain, AI and others, are transforming patient treatment models on an international scale. What this event proved is that healthcare transformation, via technology and new global models for greater access and more efficient and effective delivery of healthcare services to patients, is much closer to reality than ever before.
Many of the sessions over the two-day event focused on two main topics: healthcare interoperability, digital health, adoption, scale and equity.
On Day 1 of the event, this topic was highlighted by speakers from the UK, India, North America and the European Union. Interoperability is the ability of different healthcare systems and processes to communicate and share information with other healthcare systems and processes, either within or across organizational borders, in order to advance the effective delivery of healthcare. The consensus was that patients will enable interoperability through trust – a pivotal facet of adoption and scale.
Technology players will have to continue to grow in partnership with healthcare systems, which will be required for both the systems and for consumers.
According to Keynote speaker, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, “Digital health is a new reality that will bridge disparity and access to those with lower income and the underserved.” Other Keynotes from Teladoc Health and Mayo Clinic Digital Platform emphasized transforming health care with digital health and virtual care delivery systems, which would make care affordable and equitable, decrease disparities among income levels and geographies, and create global standards and regulations for citizens and health systems around the world.
But digital health is a broad term, one that encompasses several technologies, including telehealth, virtual care, and digital tools and services, and requiring integrations that make health care delivery broader, easier and more flexible.
A Keynote session titled, “Virtual Health: The Next Frontier for Healthcare,” with Alex Harris, Partner, McKinsey & Company and moderated by Lyle Berkowitz, MD, FACP, FHIMSS, CEO of Back9 Healthcare Consulting discussed he radical digitization of health care with supply and demand factored in. Healthcare has lagged behind other industries in terms of digitization. But on the consumer (patient) side, mindset and behavior changes have moved the needle on telemedicine visits, and it is projected that 60% of those over age 65 will avail themselves of this technology in the near future.
Physicians question the effectiveness of telehealth visits and financial compensation, and they wonder about adoption and when it will stabilize. Telehealth visits were high in April, but decreased, perhaps due to restrictions in movement as things shut down.
The challenges to adoption that still exist include funding and parity for certain services and long-term reimbursement. Fee-for-service vs. value-based is still unclear. So while providers are still wondering about financial implications, consumers are starting to feel more comfortable.
It is clear that this past year has presented both many challenges to healthcare delivery and opportunities for innovations. The manner in which health care is delivered is occurring at a time when traditional physical interaction between patient and provider has basically been a “cease and desist order” for the safety of both parties.
To learn more and get access to the agenda and program, visit https://conv2x-2020-ondemand.eventcreate.com/
For a top line introduction and select presentations visit TMT at https://telehealthandmedicinetoday.com/index.php/journal/ConV2X2020
Building Telemedicine into the Post-COVID-19 U.S. Health Care Delivery System
Stephanie J. Zawada, M.S.
Affiliations: Mayo Clinic School of Medicine and Science, Yale University Sherwin B. Nuland Institute, American Medical Students Association
During the COVID-19 public health emergency, interest in telehealth soared to an all-time high. Specifically, telemedicine, the delivery of clinical health care services to remote patients using telecommunications tools, is seen as the most promising mode of health care delivery in the near future, with investor capital flowing into telemedicine platforms.
Regulatory waivers provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), executive orders issued by state governors, and mandatory social distancing measures fueled the widespread use of telemedicine during the pandemic. Healthcare stakeholders should keep the following telemedicine issues in mind as we prepare for the 2020-21 flu season:
Today, the methodological frameworks for the clinical validation of digital health technologies are still being developed. Separately defining telemedicine and telehealth services is critical to ensuring patient safety and promoting innovation. If telehealth is regulated like telemedicine, innovation will be limited. (Think about the potential of requiring artificial intelligence to pass licensure exams to deliver care.) If telemedicine is regulated like telehealth, patient safety could be compromised. (Think about online surveys where you can fill out questions to get a lifestyle drug without a doctor’s prescription. A heart attack patient in the ER who does not have this prescription in his EHR might then be prescribed drugs that lead to harmful drug interactions.)
States should address licensure reform that allows out-of-state physicians to practice telemedicine with in-state residents. Many states temporarily implemented this approach for the duration of the pandemic. This would allow patients in rural areas with a physician shortage to access doctors in near-by states and enable patients in states without a world-renowned medical center to access telemedicine care rendered by top-ranked specialists.
Additionally, as rural hospitals face ever-increasing financial challenges, telemedicine reimbursement parity offers them an opportunity to restructure their services. Mercy Virtual Hospital is a blueprint for adapting the delivery of health care services to meet the needs of the digital age.
Business expensing for telemedicine is possible. For instance, technology investments for telemedicine practice, such as “software, hardware, or hosting fees”, may be deductible. Even 3D-printed medical devices may qualify for R&D tax credits. For telemedicine doctors using a home office, the “space and the equipment that [they] use to work from home are all part of [their] tax deduction…[as well as] part of [their] home’s utility costs, internet costs, and even mortgage” .
Telemedicine use amid COVID-19 outbreak: A global perspective
Affiliations: Md Azharuddin1, PhD, Mohammad Adil2, PhD, Prem Kapur3, MD, Pinaki Ghosh4, PhD, Manju Sharma2, PhD
1Department of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Division of Pharmacology, School of
Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India
2Department of Pharmacology, School of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Jamia
Hamdard, New Delhi, India
3Department of Medicine, Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Jamia
Hamdard, New Delhi, India
4Department of Pharmacology, Poona College of Pharmacy, Bharati Vidyapeeth, Pune, India
In December 2019, several unidentified pneumonia cases were reported in Wuhan, China, caused by β-coronavirus, a novel strain of coronavirus (2019-nCoV). On 11 February 2020, WHO officially announced “COVID-19” as the name of this new disease.1 It is steadily rising by human-to-human transmission and has confirmed 26,31839 cases worldwide, till April 24, 2020.2 The WHO declared the outbreak a global public health emergency on January 30, 2020.2 COVID-19 pandemic has put most of the countries under public health as well as economic strain.3 Several measures have taken by different countries to cope with COVID-19 outbreak. Now the global health crisis continues to escalate, telemedicine critically stepped into the spotlight in health care system to slowing the COVID-19 outbreak.
Telemedicine is the use of electronic information and telecommunications technologies including, videoconferencing, internet, store-and-forward imaging, streaming media, telephone calls and wireless communications. It promotes and improve the vast distances patient and clinical health care by the means of interactions between patients and clinicians or between two or more consulting practitioners.4 Additionally, interactions of telemedicine have a different role in patient care. Synchronous interaction, where patients and consulting practitioners interacted in real-time. It is a two-way communication using audio-visual technology (e.g., video call). It may use to diagnose a disease, and provide treatment. Asynchronous telemedicine not providing the direct patient care, the shared information can be reviewed and answered in a delay of time between patients and consulting practitioners (e.g., e-mail).4 It may use to provide a patient care and healthcare opinion.
As the COVID-19 contributing higher fatalities among immunocompromised people like chronic diseases and comorbidities, it can be used to avoid virus exposure by the means of reducing hospital visits.5 In addition to, it can reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission among health care professionals those working tirelessly in the frontlines by keeping all the significant infected patients out of hospital. 5 Televisiting and teleconsultation can be used to triage more patients, screen and diagnose remotely.5
According to Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), it also supports cost effective care by keeping patients to unlikely visit to emergency department and face to face consultations.6
In recent, due to wreaks havoc of COVID-19 virus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) a Federal agency urging the public and healthcare professional to use telehealth programs for communication in an effort to reduce the burden of unnecessary emergency rooms and clinics visits.
The World Health Organization (WHO), CDC, as well as several state public health agencies have suggested that telemedicine service must considered as an essential part of healthcare provider in “strengthening the Health Systems Response to COVID-19” policy. In addition, according to a new WHO policy, within the adequate service delivery action, it should be considered as one of the alternative models for clinical services and clinical decision support.
A survey carried out among U.S. patients have shown that 84% are more likely to choose those providers who offers telemedicine. In Israel, a TytoCare’s telehealth solution has launched a TytoHomeTM kit to examine COVID-19 patients in quarantine wards, as well as to monitor patients in isolation stays and home quarantine.5
TytoCare’s partners is all set to emerged the solution and expanded their use in the US and Europe. In recent March 25, 2020, the American Medical Association (AMA) launches telemedicine during COVID-19 outbreak, where physicians and experts can discuss the several issues and share the experiences over the ongoing pandemics. Also, the Government agencies are associated with industry leaders in virtual care. Ro is a patient-driven virtual telehealth company launched a digital health clinic, now it became a part of the White House’s Tech Task Force for coronavirus, aims to be the patient's first call for all of their healthcare needs.7
On March 25, 2020, the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) with NITI Aayog and Board of Governors (BoG) Medical Council of India (MCI) launched the official guidelines for telemedicine practices to prevent transmission of virus.8 Advised all the registered medical practitioners and doctors to provide and support healthcare services remotely via phone or online communication consultation where citizen go on nationwide lockdown for 21 days. Under this consideration, doctors can write prescriptions based on receiving telephonic, textual or video conversations-chat, images, messaging, emails, fax and others.8
This is a crucial step for digital health, and the decision has been lauded by current digital healthcare solutions, who believed that this is the need of the hour especially when the world is facing unprecedented challenges with the coronavirus pandemic.
Furthermore, there are several online health services such as Practo, 1mg, Medlife, mFine, significantly stepped in online consultations during the COVID-19 pandemics, where 1mg claimed a 300% rise in e-consultations for flu and fever-related illnesses since the beginning of March 2020. The telecommunication received from across the country, nearly 600 cities and towns. In addition, Practo, an online doctor-consultation service reported that, it sharply increases in telemedicine calls after a week since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in India.9 Additionally, the USA, Israel, UK, Nordics and France are amongst the leading countries with established telehealth providers, and their cumulative experience is helping to respond to the current situation.10
This study briefly addressed the global perspectives towards use of telemedicine, in order to deliver and ensure the patient health and safety of health care professionals. Therefore, all countries are suggested to use telemedicine during this pandemic and set up an infrastructure for the next inevitable, infectious disease, if emerge.
Sun Pharmaceuticals, India, for providing assistantship for this project under the joint collaboration for the Ph.D. programme with Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India.
Why Veterinary TeleHealth is Critical to Keeping Our Pets (And Ourselves) Healthy During - And After - the COVID-19 Crisis
Hannah Cheng Lau, DVM
I have been very lucky to work almost exclusively in the field of veterinary telemedicine for over a year. I see patients over video and phone consults for a myriad of issues that can be managed at home. Planning, implementing, and troubleshooting a well-rounded telemedicine program in our large 30-veterinarian hospital has been exciting, new, and intimidating for everyone involved. A year ago we had no idea how extensively the program would be put to the test with the public health crisis that is COVID-19. Telehealth has a whole new purpose in this new reality. We have realized that while trying to ride the wave of current events, many of our colleagues are just dusting off their surfboards - or even more concerning, are still sitting on the beach.
I believe strongly that telehealth is an essential organ in the veterinary beast - and it has been for years. Telehealth has always been a part of any veterinary business, and it happens every day in every practice around the world. Like any untrained muscle, it can be challenging and uncomfortable to intentionally strengthen it - but it has always been there. When I speak to my colleagues about telehealth, the first thing I remind them of is that they are already doing it. Granted, a big portion of this is done by paraprofessional staff: mainly client service representatives, veterinary nurses, and assistants. Teletriage and teleadvice is being regularly performed over the phone, either when the client first contacts the clinic, or as veterinary nurse consults. Continuing care is also done daily on the phone, through email, or with voicemail tag. All of these communications, when done well, take hours of employee time and require years of professional and on-the-job training. Although the medium of multiple phone calls and voicemails feels familiar and therefore comforting, they are inefficient to document, confusing for a third party to interpret, and difficult to monetize.
With the continuing effects of COVID-19 stretching out with unknown horizons into the future, likely resulting in a society that is forever changed, it is naive and perhaps negligent to assume life will return to “normal” and telemedicine will become a dying fad. COVID-19 has underlined the importance of telemedicine to the general populace by helping clients and providers socially distance and reduce unnecessary travel. However, this has always been and will continue to be a concern for many of our clients even without a worldwide health crisis. COVID-19 has opened all of our eyes to the dangers and anxieties of navigating the world as someone who is immunocompromised. However, those concerns will continue to exist for our community members who are battling illness, differently abled, do not have acces
Telehealth and Medicine Today ISSN 2471-6960 |
An Open Access Online Peer Reviewed Journal Published by Partners in Digital Health.
THMT is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
THMT will also publish content in other products such as license editions of THMT and grant republication sublicense in journals around the world.
Owned and managed by Partners in Digital Health (PDH) founder and publisher Tory Cenaj.