Editorial Staff

As COVID-19 Emergencies Ease, Some Progress on Telehealth Rules

/in , , , , , /by Editorial Staff
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on
LinkedIn
+

BOSTON, MA (Feb. 15, 2023) — As public health emergency declarations related to the COVID-19 pandemic come to an end, a new study from Pioneer Institute, Cicero Institute, and Reason Foundation rates every state’s telehealth laws. The report finds Arizona and Delaware rate best across four key telehealth policy areas, while highlighting some progress in New England.

Legislation in Vermont creates a clear path to allow out-of-state providers to see Vermont patients, although some barriers to access remain; in New Hampshire, new legislation gives a green light to providers to start a telehealth visit by any mode that works for them and their patients. While Massachusetts scores a “green” rating on three of the measures, the state continues to bar access to telehealth services across state lines.

With the three-year COVID-19 pandemic largely under control, the Biden administration recently announced plans to end the COVID-19 national public health emergency on May 11. Most states have already ended their public health emergency declarations, so the temporary orders and waivers that allowed millions of patients to access telehealth services during the pandemic need to be turned into permanent laws, or patients risk losing access to healthcare options and providers may lose significant incentives to innovate, a new report warns.

The policy brief rates all 50 states in four critical areas of telehealth policy and details what each state needs to do to improve.

Arizona and Delaware stand out as the only two states rated green for good in all four key telehealth law categories related to enabling patients to access high-quality telehealth care and giving healthcare providers the flexibility to provide a variety of services now and in the future. In contrast, three states—New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia—fail to score green in any of the four categories the report deems critical to today’s telehealth services and future innovation.

The report grades every state’s telehealth laws in four areas crucial to patients, quality of care, and creating a regulatory environment that doesn’t stifle future healthcare improvements. It recommends that states:

  • Should define telehealth in broad terms that do not favor one type of telehealth model, giving current patients options and leaving room for future innovations.
  • Allow modal neutrality so services can be provided via audio, video, text, email, and other modes of communication.
  • Allow patients to access telehealth services, doctors, and providers across state lines.
  • Allow doctors, nurse practitioners, and others to provide all the medical services they’re trained to provide.

“A surprising number of states have only made minor tweaks to their telehealth laws,” said Josh Archambault, coauthor of the policy brief and senior fellow at Pioneer Institute and the Cicero Institute. “Lawmakers must refocus their efforts to ensure their states have clear laws and guidelines in place so that patients and providers can benefit from today’s telehealth services and future innovations.”

“During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients discovered and utilized a variety of telehealth options that offered flexible, affordable, and high-quality care, and those options shouldn’t be taken away,” added Vittorio Nastasi, coauthor and a policy analyst at Reason Foundation. “States need to improve their laws so patients have as many quality care options as possible and the future healthcare system can become more patient-centric.”

The full report, State Policy Agenda for Telehealth Innovation, also outlines how each state can modernize and upgrade its telehealth laws without stifling future advancements.

Contact

Josh Archambault at (617) 645-7679 or jarchambault@pioneerinstitute.org

Get Updates On Our Healthcare Research and Events!

Related Posts:

Study Finds Obstacles to Search for Opioid Substitute

Inflation Reduction Act price controls on the category of…

Transformative Medical Therapy Will Require New Cost-Benefit and Pricing Models

Current regulations increase development and manufacturing costs,…

Genetic Therapy Revolution: Benefits and Barriers for Medicine’s New Horizon

Joe Selvaggi talks with neurobiologist and writer Dr. Anne Sydor about the potential for gene therapy to address deadly and debilitating diseases and how current health care models must adapt to encourage this nascent technology.

Boston Children’s, MGH Among Massachusetts Hospitals with Highest Relative Commercial Prices

Pioneer Institute's new tool, the Massachusetts Hospital Relative Price Tracker, displays relative price and facilitates relative price comparisons among hospitals. The average price among all hospitals will have a relative price of 1.0. A relative price of 1.5 means that a hospital charges 50 percent higher than the average of all Massachusetts hospitals. Similarly, a relative price of 0.84 means that a hospital’s prices are 16 percent below average. Relative price data is collected and reported by the Commonwealth’s Center for Health Information and Analysis (CHIA) and is an aggregate measure used to evaluate price variations among different hospitals. It is recalculated annually based on data collected from commercial payers and includes information on private commercial insurance and commercially managed public insurance products such as Medicare Advantage and Medicaid Managed Organizations/Accountable Care Partnership Plans.

Middlemen Pushing Up Retail Costs of Drugs

The reality is that non-price factors, including several players, are causing net prices to decline and retail prices to increase. Those players include employers, health plans, and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), all of whom have continuously circumvented the system through loopholes and complicated systems of reimbursement that tend to hurt patients

Telehealth Progress Slowed in 2023

A new report by Cicero Institute, Pioneer Institute, and Reason Foundation reveals worrying stagnation in state-level telehealth expansion efforts in 2023, with only a few exceptions. Progress made during the pandemic is being lost even as provider shortages worsen, raising concerns about patients’ access to care.

‘High’ U.S. Drug Prices Mask Freeloading by Other Nations

The drug company’s choice is to walk away from millions in revenue from a given country and deny their people a lifesaving drug, or swallow hard and accept an unfair price that is nowhere near the drug’s value. For the sake of shareholders and patients, drug companies typically accept the unfair price and devote the revenue to offsetting their previous investments. In short, other nations are freeloading off of American R&D.

Drug Discount Distortions: How Middlemen Increase Costs and Reduce Access

Joe Selvaggi talks with Drs. Bill Smith and Robert Popovian about how the complex system of rebates from drug companies to insurance firms serve to increase costs and reduce access for patients.

Opinion: Drug patents aren’t a ‘necessary evil.’ They save lives.

Drug patents are one of the most important public policy innovations in all of human history, and a boon to patients awaiting cures. Inventions only come when inventors are rewarded, not punished. Patents are not a “necessary evil.”

Study: High List Prices and Deep Discounts for Prescription Drugs Hurt Poor and Sick Patients

A new Pioneer Institute study illustrates how the current system of drug pricing and discounts leads to patients with challenging diseases being charged huge out-of-pocket sums to keep other premiums low, effectively imposing financial penalties on the sick to protect the healthy and wealthy.