The wind may finally be at the back of telehealth distribution and payment (US)

Medicare Advantage may lead, but Medicaid and regular Medicare are not far behind. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has announced in two proposed rules changes expansion of telehealth access for both privately issued Medicare Advantage (MA) plans (26 Oct) and state-run Medicaid and CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Plan) (14 Nov) plan members. This may mean greater acceptance by providers because they will be paid for these services.

For MA, the proposal would, starting in 2020 as part of government funded basic benefits, eliminate geographic restrictions (rural telehealth) and allow members in urban areas to access telehealth services. It would also broaden present location restrictions, allowing MA members to receive telehealth from home versus traveling to a health care facility. The most intriguing wording is here: “Plans would also have greater flexibility to offer clinically-appropriate telehealth benefits that are not otherwise available to Medicare beneficiaries.” which very well could mean remote patient monitoring in conjunction with visits. MA plans have always had more latitude to offer telehealth benefits to members, which are about 1/3 of Medicare-eligibles (over 65). Over 11 percent growth is forecast and it is highly competitive though dominated by United Healthcare and Aetna–over 600 new plans are entering the market next year. Enrollments close on 7 Dec for 2019. CMS.gov release, mHealth Intelligence, Healthcare Finance News.

For Medicaid and CHIP, which states use to extend insurance to low-income individuals and families via private plans, states would be able to, under an approved rule, to more flexibly determine what criteria determine telehealth access. Currently, states use proximity factors–distance from provider and time. The proposed criteria under 10. Network Adequacy (pages 15-16) recommends that time and distance be deleted and instead “adding a more flexible requirement that states set a quantitative minimum access standard (later listed) for specified health care providers and LTSS (long term services and supports) providers”. The reasons why are the limited supply of providers and the functional limitations of the LTSS population. Also notable was language in section 8 discussing access to provider directories via smartphone, as 64 percent of the population with incomes less than $30,000 own a smartphone and use it to access health information.  CMS proposed rule, POLITICO Morning eHealth

This adds to the momentum of the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule published on 1 Nov that added even more:

  • Virtual brief patient checkins and evaluation of patient-recorded photos and video to payments
  • CMS is also finalizing separate payments for three new codes covering chronic care remote physiologic monitoring that unbundle 99091 (CPT codes 99453, 99454, and 99457) and interprofessional internet consultation (CPT codes 99451, 99452, 99446, 99447, 99448, and 99449).
  • Two new codes covering telehealth for prolonged preventive services
  • Finalizing the addition of renal dialysis facilities and the homes of ESRD beneficiaries receiving home dialysis as originating sites
  • After 1 July, the home will be permitted as a permissible originating site for telehealth services furnished for purposes of treatment of a substance use disorder or a co-occurring mental health disorder. CMS.gov fact sheet 

The importance of this is that more digital health covered by Medicare and government payments in public/private programs such as Medicaid and MA lead private insurers to pay doctors for these services, who will then be willing to pay vendors for providing them. For the telehealth and telemedicine companies that have weathered the storms and lean times of the past decade, there may be light at the end of the tunnel that is not an oncoming train.

CMS urged to further reimburse telehealth remote patient monitoring with three new CPT codes

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), which controls payments to doctors for the Medicare and state Medicaid programs, has been urged by 49 healthcare organizations and technology vendors to further unbundle the controlling CPT code for remote patient monitoring (RPM), 99091. The 2018 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) Final Rule finally separated RPM from telemedicine remote visits by permitting separate payment for remote physiological data monitoring by unbundling CPT 99091 to reimburse for patient-generated health data (PGHD)–a new term. The letter to Administrator Seema Verma proposes 2019 adoption of three additional American Medical Association CPT Editorial Panel-developed codes which further break down various aspects of RPM, while maintaining 99091. 

CPT codes for Medicare and Medicaid are important because they also influence private insurers’ reimbursement policies. Practices which get paid for RPM are more likely to adopt enabling technologies if they are affordable within how they are paid. 

CMS started to include telehealth RPM in 2015 in a chronic care management code, 99490, but specifically prohibited the use of CPT 99091 in conjunction with CCM. This created a lot of confusion after some brief moments of hope by tying technology to a complex CCM model.

It’s possibly a ‘light at end of the tunnel’ development for hungry tech companies, but one which won’t be determined till end of year when PFS rules are released. Also Healthcare Dive.

Soapbox: JPM’s Dimon takes the 50,000 foot view on the JP Morgan Chase-Berkshire Hathaway-Amazon health joint venture

Mr. Jamie Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JP Morgan Chase, had a few thoughts about the JPM-Berkshire Hathaway-Amazon healthcare JV for all three companies. You’ll have to fill up the tea or coffee mug (make it a small pot) for it’s an exceedingly prolix Annual Shareholder Letter you’ll have to sled through to find those comments. Your Editor has taken her punishment to find them, towards the end of the letter in ‘Public Policy’. 

They demonstrate what this Editor suspected–an headache-inducing mix of generalities and overreach, versus starting modestly and over-delivering.

  • Point #1 sets up what has gone wrong. Among several, “Our nation’s healthcare costs are twice the amount per person compared with most developed nations.” Under point 2 on how poor public policy happened, an admission that Obamacare fixed little:

Here’s another example: We all know that the U.S. healthcare system needs to be reformed. Many have advocated getting on the path to universal healthcare for all Americans. The creation of Obamacare, while a step in the right moral direction, was not well done. America has 290 million people who have insurance — 180 million through private enterprise and 110 million through Medicare and Medicaid. Obamacare slightly expanded both and created exchanges that insure 10 million people. But it did very little to fix our broken healthcare system and has, in fact, torn up the body politic over 10 years — and this tumult may go on for another 10 years.

  • Point #7 is about fixing the deficit and the ill effects if we don’t. In Mr. Dimon’s view, healthcare is a major part of this through the uncontrolled growth of entitlements, with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security leading the pack–skipping over the fact that nearly all Americans pay into Medicare and SSI well in advance of any entitlement collection. Healthcare is also an offender through unnecessary costs such as administrative and fraud (25-40 percent),  and six mainly chronic conditions accounting for 75 percent of spending.
  • The experts–specifically, their experts–will fix it! “While we don’t know the exact fix to this problem, we do know the process that will help us fix it. We need to form a bipartisan group of experts whose direct charge is to fix our healthcare system. I am convinced that this can be done, and if done properly, it will actually improve the outcomes and satisfaction of all American citizens.”
  • The generalities continue with
    • The JV “will help improve the satisfaction of our healthcare services for our employees (that could be in terms of costs and outcomes) and possibly help inform public policy for the country.” 
    • Aligning incentives systemwide ‘because we’re getting what we incentivize’
    • “Studying the extraordinary amount of money spent on waste, administration and fraud costs.”
    • “Empowering employees to make better choices and have the best options available by owning their own healthcare data with access to excellent telemedicine options, where more consumer-driven health initiatives can help.”
    • “Developing better wellness programs, particularly around obesity and smoking — they account for approximately 25% of chronic diseases (e.g., cancer, stroke, heart disease and depression).”
    • “Determining why costly and specialized medicine and pharmaceuticals are frequently over- and under-utilized.”
    • “Examining the extraordinary amount of money spent on end-of-life care, often unwanted.”
    • “To attack these issues, we will be using top management, big data, virtual technology, better customer engagement and the improved creation of customer choice (high deductibles have barely worked”).

This Editor has observed from the vantage of the health tech, analytics, payer, and care model businesses that nearly every company has addressed or is addressing all these concerns. So what’s new here? Perhaps the scale, but will they tap into the knowledge base those businesses represent or reinvent the wheel? 

A bad sign is Mr. Dimon’s inclusion of ‘end of life care’. This last point is a prime example of overreach–how many of the JV’s employees are in this situation? The ‘attack’ tactics? We’ve seen, heard, and many of us have been part of similar efforts.

Prediction: This JV may be stuck at the 50,000 foot view. It will take a long time, if ever, to descend and produce the concrete, broadly applicable results that it eagerly promises to its million-plus employees, much less the polity. 

Is Uber fit to deliver healthcare transport? Healthcare organizations may want to check.

Healthcare-related organizations have codes of conduct pertaining to suppliers. Does Uber meet compliance standards? As we reported a few days ago in our article on the burgeoning area of non-emergency medical transport (NEMT) [TTA 9 Mar], Uber Health’s debut with a reputed 100 healthcare organizations has led this Editor to a further examination of Uber, the organization. Uber has had a hard time staying out of the headlines–and the courts–in the past two years, in matters which might give healthcare partners pause.

  • On 21 Nov, Uber reported that the personal data of 57 million users, including 600,000 US drivers, were breached and stolen in October 2016–a full year prior. Not only was the breach announcement delayed by over a year, but also in that year it was made to go away by Uber’s paying off the hacker. Reuters on 6 December: “A 20-year-old Florida man was responsible for the large data breach at Uber Technologies Inc [UBER.UL] last year and was paid by Uber to destroy the data through a so-called “bug bounty” program normally used to identify small code vulnerabilities, three people familiar with the events have told Reuters.” The payment was an extraordinary $100,000. “The sources said then-CEO Travis Kalanick was aware of the breach and bug bounty payment in November of last year.” The Reuters article goes further into the mechanism of the hack. It eventually led to the resignation of their chief security officer, former Facebook/eBay/PayPal security head Joe Sullivan, who ‘investigated’ it using encrypted, disappearing messaging apps. Atlantic.
  • CEO and co-founder Travis Kalanick was forced to resign last June after losing the confidence of the company’s investors, in contrails of financial mismanagement, sexual harassment, driver harassment, and ‘bro culture’. This included legal action over Uber’s 2016 acquisition of self-driving truck startup Otto, started by former Googlers who may or may not have lifted proprietary tech from Google before ankling. These are lavishly outlined in Bloomberg and in an over-the-top article in Engadget (with the usual slams at libertarianism). Mr. Kalanick remains on the board and is now a private investor.
  • The plain fact is that Uber is still burning through funds (2017: $1bn) after raising $21.1bn and its valuation has suffered. The new CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, who earlier righted travel site Expedia, has a tough pull with investors such as SoftBank and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. Also Mashable.

Healthcare and NEMT, as noted in our earlier article, are a strong source of potential steady revenue through reimbursement in Medicare Advantage and state Medicaid programs, which is why both Uber and Lyft are targeting it. The benefits for all sides–patients, practices, these companies, sub-contractors, and drivers–can be substantial and positive in this social determinant of health (SDOH).  

Healthcare organizations, especially payers, have strict codes of compliance not only for employees and business practices but also for their suppliers’ practices. Payers in Medicare Advantage and Medicaid are Federal and state contractors. While Uber under its new CEO has shown contriteness in acknowledging an organization in need of righting its moral compass (CNBC), there remains the track record and the aftermath. Both deserve a closer look and review.

Telehealth policy and reimbursement changes summarized by Center for Connected Health Policy (US)

A significant barrier to the adoption of telehealth (defined here as video consults, store and forward imaging, and remote patient monitoring) is the issue of reimbursement gaps. Basic Medicare (the Federal program for those over 65) pays for video and store and forward only under certain conditions (primarily under rural telehealth programs) but does pay for RPM as part of chronic care management (albeit under a maze of codes and procedures). Medicaid (the state low-income insurance program) is far more lenient, and private pay in states varies widely, with 36 states having some form of parity payment legislation. However, Medicare is planning expansion beyond what is covered in private plans (Medicare Advantage) by 2020. Some Federal programs such as the advanced Next Generation ACO program and the bundled payment Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement model have telehealth waivers.

The always-helpful Center for Connected Health Policy (CCHP) has published a five-page guide to where these programs stand. Becker’s Hospital Review. CCHP PDF 

Improvements in telehealth reimbursement, interstate coverage urged in Florida

Florida is one of the 34 states (plus the District of Columbia) to have legislated telehealth commercial insurance coverage, usually termed ‘parity’, for telehealth (telemedicine) virtual visits. It’s also the headquarters of many telehealth related companies, which makes it surprising that it took till 2016 for legislation to pass. In the law was the formation of a Telehealth Advisory Council within Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) to report on the actual performance of insurers in paying for telehealth services. This Advisory Council recently met to review a draft copy of a 32-page report that will be sent to Florida’s Governor and Legislature later this month. That report contained some aggressive recommendations based on their provider survey, such as:

  • Establishing a practitioner/patient relationship through telehealth alone, without a prior in-person visit
  • Real parity in insurance company payment with in-person visits–in other words, payment at the same rate, which is explicitly stated in regulations in only three of the 34 states with telehealth ‘parity’ legislation
  • Amend Medicaid rules to give provider reimbursement for more telehealth services–currently, Medicaid provides for reimbursement of live video conferencing only
  • Authorize participation in interstate “compacts” that enable cross-state licensure for telehealth services. This was in the Florida House version of the bill in 2016 but dropped from the final version approved by both chambers.

The Advisory Council’s survey prior to the draft report showed lower than the national usage of telehealth: 6 percent of practitioners versus nationally 16 percent. 45 percent of Florida hospitals used telehealth, below the 52 percent of hospitals (with another 10 percent in the process) found in a 2013 national poll. For practitioners, the key barrier was financial in three areas: required investment, adequate reimbursement for services, and a financial return.

By law, the Advisory Council must complete its report by December 1, 2018, but it appears they are well ahead of schedule. Health News Florida (WUSF). Background from law firm Foley on the original legislation 14 March 2016

Action This Day in US healthcare, coming to pharma, insurance, home care and innovation

Action This Day, in Churchill’s words. Today’s news of President Trump meeting with the CEOs of US pharmaceutical companies– Novartis, Merck, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Celgene, and Amgen–along with the PhRMA association head, indicates the speed of change that this two-week old Administration intends in healthcare. Trump’s points to the Pharma Giants: drug prices need to be brought down, especially for Medicare and Medicaid patients, through competitive bidding not price-fixing; bringing home production to the US; and that there is ‘global freeloading’ on US drugs. This last is a bit vague, and the pricing part may stir some Standard Republican Resistance, but what Trump also came down firmly for is speeding up the drug approval process. In return, the execs asked for tax reform.

Notable here is this quote:  “I’ll oppose anything that makes it harder for smaller, younger companies to take the risk of bringing their product to a vibrantly competitive market,” Trump said. “That includes price-fixing by the biggest dog in the market, Medicare, which is what’s happening.” The Hill, Business Insider

Does this mean an open door and encouragement for healthcare technology?

Certainly many startups, early-stage companies, and Grizzled Pioneers are eagerly anticipating a more open healthcare business environment than the many dictates, restrictions and the constant changing of goalposts they have faced for the past eight years. The hope is an openness of the Powers That Be on the Federal side (CMS, HHS, FDA) to innovation, patient-centered care and a change away from hammering constantly on lowering cost through a multitude of controls and top-down diktats on what Healthcare Should Be.

This Editor has seen companies straining to hang in there, playing the niches, moderating their equity raises, merging, projecting profitability sometime in the future. Some have not made it. One is the pioneer telehealth company Viterion Corporation, which was quietly dissolved by its parent company in Japan for various reasons at end of last year. (Editor’s disclaimer: I was marketing director for the company.)

Already innovation is reaching long-neglected areas like home care. Home support for the aging population isn’t buzzy, analytic or sexy, but it’s ready for change. The Financial Times takes a look at this $40 bn US market, focusing on the Hometeam caregiving service presently in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which has over $43 million in investment after only three years (Crunchbase); Honor, which has over $65 million in funding, operating California and Texas. Their points of difference from traditional home care agencies involve models and technology. Hometeam employs carers who are full employees with benefits and an average of $15/hour pay, double that of the usual minimum wage paid to independent contractors. They equip carers with iPads to track what happens in the home, and to report daily to families. Honor has an algorithm to help it scale up from the 100 or so carers who are the ‘break point’ in matching carers with patient needs. In contrast, the UK is far behind in development. The article looks at Vida which uses a mix of carers and technology for its private pay clients. Now approved by the Care Quality Commission, Vida is already in talks with local councils across London and Brighton. But funding is thin: £400,000 of start-up funding and planning to raise £1 million. Tech start-ups try to fix ailing US elderly care sector. If paywalled, search on the title. Hat tip to Susanne Woodman

Action Next Days? Predictions have been all over the place since the election. Many have been overheated (and highly political), but others explain the complexities of undoing the past six years. A reminder: the PPACA did not go into effect until 2010 and most of the provisions kicked in during 2011. Health tech law firm Epstein Becker Green trotted out its crystal ball (more…)

State by State report on telehealth laws and policies (US)

A comprehensive scan of telehealth laws and Medicaid [grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/State-telehealth-laws.jpg” thumb_width=”150″ /]program policies is available from the recently released report from the Center for Connected Health Policy, part of the Public Health Institute, a California based non-profit. This fourth annual review, State Telehealth Laws and Medicaid Program Policies,  provides a current summary of telehealth policies and laws in all the states and the District of Columbia.

As we have covered in many previous articles, states are actively pursuing legislation to implement their own set of telehealth policies. This report is supposedly an up to date summary of these laws and regulations as of March 2016.

Some significant findings highlighted by the authors are
– 47 states and Washington DC provide reimbursements for some form of telemedicine video conferencing. This number is unchanged from last year.
– 9 states reimburse for store and forward services (e.g. medical images, documents and pre-recorded videos. Primarily sent between medical professionals)
– 16 states offer reimbursement for remote patient monitoring, unchanged from last year

The report is complemented by an interactive map located here.

The widening gyre of insurers covering telehealth (telemedicine?) (US)

Is a tipping point nearing? Soon? An article in Modern Healthcare that contains a heavy dollop of promotion headlines ‘telehealth’s’ adoption by insurers such as Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama, Anthem and Highmark. When read through, it’s mainly about telemedicine (video consults) but does touch on the vital signs monitoring that’s the basis of telehealth. Video consults through Teladoc and other services such as Doctor on Demand and American Well are gradually being reimbursed by private insurers, despite the concern that it would actually drive up cost by being an ‘add-on’ to an in-person visits. Medicaid increasingly covers it, and states are enacting ‘parity’ regulations equalizing in-office and virtual visits including, in many cases, telehealth. Yet the move for coverage is hampered by lack of reimbursement to doctors, or the perception of limited or no payment. Even Medicare, a big advocate for alternative models of care, currently pays little out for telehealth–$17.6 million on a $630 million+ program. The Congressional Budget Office is skeptical, despite the savings claimed by CONNECT for Health Act in both the Senate and House [TTA 12 Feb]. Virtual reality: More insurers are embracing telehealth

Arizona plans using health tech to engage Medicaid recipients

Arizona’s smartphone app-based outreach plan for its Medicaid (low-income health insurance) program has raised a few eyebrows. The app/online site would:

* Help beneficiaries find primary and urgent care providers
* Provide beneficiaries access to chronic disease management tools
* Send beneficiaries appointment reminders

The programs would use mobile, online and texting, which doesn’t require a smartphone and has historically worked well in compliance and information (e.g. Text4Baby). For the critics, however, Pew Research found that half of those with incomes under $30,000 have smartphones. This number also includes the elderly, and does not take into account recent growth–smartphone prices have decreased smartly, and are now available on pay-go plans. iHealthBeat

Telehealth reimbursement makes legislative progress in Texas, US House

In Texas, telehealth reimbursement as part of the state Medicaid program passed their House resoundingly (120 to 5!) and moved to the state Senate. (In Texas, if your bill makes it through the scrum that is their House, the Senate moves expeditiously.)  HB (House Bill) 2641 would authorize Texas’ Health & Human Services Commission (HHSC) to extend reimbursement for home telemonitoring (telehealth) services under the state Medicaid program from September this year for four years. Health care providers in Medicaid would be reimbursed for review and transmission of electronic health information. The caveat of course is that it is ‘feasible and cost effective’–it is designed to be expenditure neutral. The bill also includes extensive stipulations on health information exchanges based on national standards (ANSI) as well as amending the health and safety code for immunizations and other health conditions. The ‘criminal offense’ pertains to protected health information breaches as a misdemeanor. Telehealth inclusion in Medicaid is positive as this state insurance plan serves the poorest and often sickest, as well as many federal Medicare ‘dual eligibles’. Texas, being a large state, also sets trends (including the most reluctant to adopt cross-state telemedicine licensure.)  Text of HB2641

Would that telehealth reimbursement have the same chance in that large, exceedingly deliberative body called the US House of Representatives. HR2066, the Telehealth Enhancement Act of 2015, is similar to a bill that expired in committee in the last session. It was introduced (more…)

Nursing homes vs. hospitals for primary senior care

Another way to reduce unnecessary hospitalizations? A recent New York Times article has kicked off a debate on whether many procedures for older adults can be better delivered in a nursing home or skilled nursing facility (SNF) setting rather than in-patient hospitals. Already serving many seniors for rehabilitation and residential care for multiple chronic conditions and old age-related debilities, the dreaded transfer to hospital may be lessened by a combination of outpatient procedure and installation of 24-hour nursing at these homes. Unbelievably (to this Editor) many of the 16,000 nursing homes in the country do not have round-the-clock nursing staff; only five states require 24/7 registered nurse coverage on site and there is no Federal requirement. An advantage is that minimizing hospital stay also minimizes hospital-acquired infections, patient distress (more…)

State telemedicine legislation update (US)

Here’s some brief updates on US telemedicine legislation scene to hit the news recently.

Florida

Florida is progressing the telehealth bill we reported on 12 Feb 2015. The Florida Senate [grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Florida-House-of-Representattives.jpg” thumb_width=”150″ /]Telehealth Policy Committee revised the draft bill on 18 Feb 2015 so the need for Medicaid reimbursements to be the same for telemedicine and face-to-face consultations is removed.

Mississippi

We have reported many telehealth initiatives from Mississippi and the state is now considered to be “a leader in telemedicine” according to a recent report in Politico. “Mississippi’s telemedicine program, ranked among the seven best in the country, has inspired neighboring Arkansas to take bigger steps in some areas of the field, and the impact of its success is making waves in Washington as well” continues Politico.

Mississippi is also helping to move telehealth at a federal level. Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.) and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) introduced a bipartisan bill in July last year to expand telehealth services under Medicare. The bill called Medicare [grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/mississippi-logo1.jpg” thumb_width=”150″ /]Telehealth Parity Act 2014 starts to move face to face and telehealth consultations to be on an equal footing.

(more…)

Florida to try telehealth legislation – again

After repeatedly failing to pass a law to formalise payments for telehealth, Florida State [grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Florida-House-of-Representattives.jpg” thumb_width=”150″ /]legislature is to try again this year, according to Florida state senator Aaron Bean. Moderating the Telemedicine and Telehealth session at the Florida Health Care Affordability Summit on Monday, 8 February, Sen. Bean has suggested that the latest bill, highly focused on telehealth, will be only 3 pages long. Attempts to legislate in in the previous session of the Florida House of Representatives resulted in failed bills in both chambers due to the inclusion of many controversial items.

(more…)

Medicare dis-incentivizes home health care in ACA’s name (US)

When it comes to home health care, the C in CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) should perhaps stand for ‘contradiction’. According to recent reports appearing in the pre-holiday ‘dead zone’ of late last week, CMS has decreed that it must save, as part of a four-year plan under ACA, $58 million (0.3 percent) in fiscal 2015 (starting 1 Oct) from home health agencies which were formerly touted as a great way to save money. To put this in perspective: in 2013, Medicare paid about 12,000 home health agencies $18 billion to provide services to 3.5 million patients. In the US, Medicare has always had more restrictive rules for home and community-based services (HCBS); state-administered (but Federally subsidized) means-tested Medicaid still pays for the vast majority of long-term care (well over 60 percent, according to another Federal agency, Housing and Urban Development [HUD]), which strikes many observers as one pocket to another. So where are the contradictions?

  • Conundrum #1: CMS has emphasized post-discharge, post-acute care as part of reducing acute care costs, exemplified in the penalty for 30-day same-cause readmissions. Nursing home expenditure is at least three times more costly than in-home LTC (a conservative estimate used by HUD).
    • But CMS plans to cut Medicare home health funding in total so fewer people may receive it at all or less of it even if needed. What will be their alternative, and the effect on outcomes? (more…)

A kudo for kiosks: HealthSpot Station adds $8 million funding

[grow_thumb image=”http://telecareaware.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/booth-Dr.-Jenkins-with-attendant-300dpi-website.jpg” thumb_width=”150″ /] In a week of small funding announcements, HealthSpot announced an add of $8 million to its 2013 $10 million round, totaling $18.3 million of a $20 million offering (SEC filing). Investors are not disclosed. In three years, HealthSpot has raised an impressive total funding of $23 million (CrunchBase), although the company is still in pilot in a handful of locations around their Ohio HQ and reports minimal revenue. The company’s hosted, fully enclosed kiosks with both telehealth monitoring and virtual consult capabilities debuted at the end of 2012 at International CES New York. According to their website, their markets are facility waiting rooms, pharmacies, schools, military bases and prisons. Their partnerships have been notable: EHR Netsmart, telemedicine network Teladoc and a co-location arrangement with Canadian pharmacy kiosk MedAvail [TTA 23 Jan]. They are also on the board of the Alliance for Connected Care lobbying advocacy group [TTA 13 Feb], which will certainly aid their cause by plumping for increased telehealth coverage by Medicaid beyond the present 20 states and Medicare beyond rural special programs. Yes, they will be at ATA 2014, if you are attending. Mobihealthnews