Is Telemedicine Missing from Health Reform?

Perhaps in recognition of its benefits to areas affected by shortfalls in specialists and primary care physicians or the need for remote monitoring, telemedicine received significant funding in the ARRA. For instance, the Rural Utilities Service was allocated $2.5 billion to fund “shovel-ready” distance learning, telemedicine, and broadband program; the Indian Health Services received $85 million to fund telemedicine; and a portion of the $2 billion allocated to the Office of the National Coordinator is to be used to support the “infrastructure and tools for the promotion of telemedicine.” However, in contrast to the ARRA, the current reform proposals publicly available are missing language facilitating telemedicine which otherwise could be a key component to one of the goals of health reform, bending the cost curve

 

The only attention telemedicine receives in the House Tri-Committee Bill – the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 – is in the creation of the Telehealth Advisory Committee. This Committee will advise and make recommendations to the HHS Secretary regarding policies for payment of telemedicine services. However, the Senate HELP’s Bill – the Affordable Choices Act – does not even mention telemedicine. 

           

Should something be done regarding this missing health reform element? A group of experts have eloquently made the argument that the present infatuation with electronic health records (“EHRs”) should be expanded to focus on improving the quality of care and equities of care, while decreasing the cost and fragmentation of such care by encouraging the development of telemedicine (which includes, as a component, EHRs). 

           

Also, Intel CEO Paul Otellini provides a sensible guide for achieving comprehensive health reform – and two of his recommendations are reliant on telemedicine. First, he suggests paying providers for outcomes, not just face-to-face visits. If payment was outcome based – even if the correct outcome was achieved in part by utilizing email, the financial interests of the provider would be more closely aligned with the desired goal of the patient, i.e., better health. The other recommendation that involves telemedicine is the development of a nationally-licensed cadre of “virtual care clinicians” to provide care to patients in their home. In the case of an elderly individual with a chronic disease, this could be the difference between staying in their home and moving into a skilled nursing facility and, obviously, the cost between the two options is significant. 

ARRA and Health IT: What's in it for me?

As the Senate and House begin final negotiations today on the conference report for the nearly $800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), stakeholders are left asking, what’s in it for me? If the question comes from those interested in obtaining funding to support health information technology, the answer is... a lot.

Health IT stands at the forefront of the health reform debate. It was an issue of frequent mention on the campaign trail, with Presdient Obama pledging to invest $10 billion a year over the next five years to move the U.S. towards broad adoption of a robust health IT infrastructure. The funding for health IT included in the ARRA is viewed by many as the first down-payment on the President's promise.

Highlights of the health IT language in the House and Senate recovery packages include:

  • Over $20 billion in Medicare and Medicaid incentive payments to hospitals and physicians
  • Between $2-3 billion in funding to support infrastructure development (activites carried out by ONCHIT, grants and loans to states)
  • Significant changes to regulation of the privacy and security of electronically maintained or transmitted health information 

From an implementation perspective, the legislation grants broad discretion to the yet to be named Secretary of Health and Human Services. This makes the forthcoming appointment even more critical to those involved in the health reform debate with a keen interest in health IT.

Despite the challenges that lay ahead, health IT proponents are already hailing the recovery package as a success, citing the CBO estimate that incentive payments would boost health IT adoption rates to about 70 percent for hospitals and about 90 percent for physicians. But the unknown, and perhaps more important, measure of success-- whether the significant investment actually translates into real savings systemwide-- remains to be seen.