A New Frontier in Telehealth Research: A National Telehealth Data Warehouse.

Importance: Given the rapid increase in telehealth utilization since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become essential to examining the vast amount of available data on telehealth encounters to conduct more cogent, robust, and large-scope research studies to examine the utility, cost-impact, and effect on clinical outcomes that telehealth can potentially provide. However, the diversity of data collected by numerous telehealth organizations has made that type of analysis difficult. Objective: The University of Mississippi Medical Center (UMMC), a Telehealth Center of Excellence designated by the Health Resources and Services Administration, is creating a National Telehealth Data Warehouse. Design: UMMC will develop the data warehouse in Microsoft Azure and will use a data dictionary that was created by the Center for Telehealth and eHealth Law (CTeL) to support their national cost-benefit study on the use of telehealth during COVID-19. Impact: The data warehouse will provide unparalleled opportunities to conduct cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses on telehealth, to develop and test quality measures specific to telehealth, and to understand how telehealth and reduce disparities in health care and expand access to care for everyone. The warehouse is expected to go live in the Summer of 2023.

Lack of evidence for telehealth fraud.

Despite evidence to the contrary, U.S. policy makers, payers, and the public continue to express apprehension that the use of telehealth is associated with increased risk of fraud and abuse. The fraudulent use of telehealth is multifaceted and complex, ranging from potentially false claims to miscoding, inaccurate billing, and kickbacks. For the past 6 years, the U.S. Federal Government has undertaken research studies to examine potential fraud issues related to the use of telehealth, including up-coding time spent with the patient, misrepresentation of the service provided, and billing for services that were not rendered. This article reviews previous efforts to assess the risk of fraud associated with the delivery of virtual care in America, concluding that there is little evidence for higher levels of fraud and abuse related to the use of telehealth.

Framework to Advance Oncology-Related Telehealth.

PURPOSE: As telehealth is increasingly used across the clinical care spectrum to provide patient-centered care, it is important to have robust measures to assess its impact on patient outcomes and care processes. The National Quality Forum (NQF) developed a Telehealth Framework to organize measures and inform target areas for measure development that includes the following four domains: access to care, financial impact or cost, experience, and effectiveness. Our goal is to identify and categorize within the NQF domains currently existing measures of telehealth applicable to oncology to detect priority areas for future research and measure development. METHODS: We reviewed telehealth-related measures applied to oncology care reported in systematic reviews and identified NQF-endorsed quality measures related to oncology care potentially amenable to telehealth. We organized identified measures by the NQF domains to inform suggestions for advancing the care of patients with cancer through telehealth. RESULTS: We identified 12 systematic reviews representing 183 studies reporting telehealth-related oncology research. Most studied outcomes related to diagnosis and treatment or user experience and symptom monitoring. Clinical effectiveness measures were most frequently reported (38%), and most were psychosocial. Patient, family, and/or caregiver experience was the next most frequently reported measure. There were only a few other cancer-related clinical effectiveness measures (eg, morbidity). Most NQF-endorsed oncology measures amenable to telehealth applied to the domains of access to care and effectiveness, with a lack of measures informing financial impact or cost and experience. CONCLUSION: Overall, there has been a lack of quality measures to assess use of telehealth for the care of oncology patients. Future work should focus on developing measures within each of the NQF-identified domains, with special attention to the financial impact or cost domain.

Recommendations from the First National Academic Consortium of Telehealth.

In January 2015, the US Secretary of Health and Human Services announced targets for the transformation of Medicare reimbursement from a fee-for-service model to payments based on alternative payment models. People now use technology for virtually everything - from paying bills to purchasing almost anything; it is therefore natural to think that they will use technology to take ownership of their own health care. The remote provision of health care, where providers and patients are not in the same location, will allow patients to receive the right care, at the right time, at the right place, and in the manner they consider right for them. To date, much of the technological advances in medicine have been led by the technology creators rather than providers or patients. A meeting of leaders from academic medical centers was convened to brainstorm and explore new opportunities to educate the workforce, expand the science, and improve the delivery of quality care to patients through the use of telemedicine. The academic community needs to develop an evidence base that can inform new care delivery models, including the role for remote monitoring and wearable technology, as well as the methods by which the best patient-centered care can be provided. It is important that the future of medicine be determined by solid research and education rather than the latest "cool toy" to reach the market. Academic medical centers are in a unique position to help shape this future direction, collaborating to create innovative and efficient solutions for patient care. Specific calls for action are summarized.

The use of open source electronic health records within the federal safety net.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a federally funded study that examines the acquisition, implementation and operation of open source electronic health records (EHR) within safety net medical settings, such as federally qualified health centers (FQHC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study was conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago from April to September 2010. The NORC team undertook a comprehensive environmental scan, including a literature review, a dozen key informant interviews using a semistructured protocol, and a series of site visits to West Virginia, California and Arizona FQHC that were currently using an open source EHR. RESULTS: Five of the six sites that were chosen as part of the study found a number of advantages in the use of their open source EHR system, such as utilizing a large community of users and developers to modify their EHR to fit the needs of their provider and patient communities, and lower acquisition and implementation costs as compared to a commercial system. DISCUSSION: Despite these advantages, many of the informants and site visit participants felt that widespread dissemination and use of open source was restrained due to a negative connotation regarding this type of software. In addition, a number of participants stated that there is a necessary level of technical acumen needed within the FQHC to make an open source EHR effective. CONCLUSIONS: An open source EHR provides advantages for FQHC that have limited resources to acquire and implement an EHR, but additional study is needed to evaluate its overall effectiveness.

Open source electronic health records and chronic disease management.

OBJECTIVE: To study and report on the use of open source electronic health records (EHR) to assist with chronic care management within safety net medical settings, such as community health centers (CHC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study was conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago from April to September 2010. The NORC team undertook a comprehensive environmental scan, including a literature review, a dozen key informant interviews using a semistructured protocol, and a series of site visits to CHC that currently use an open source EHR. RESULTS: Two of the sites chosen by NORC were actively using an open source EHR to assist in the redesign of their care delivery system to support more effective chronic disease management. This included incorporating the chronic care model into an CHC and using the EHR to help facilitate its elements, such as care teams for patients, in addition to maintaining health records on indigent populations, such as tuberculosis status on homeless patients. DISCUSSION: The ability to modify the open-source EHR to adapt to the CHC environment and leverage the ecosystem of providers and users to assist in this process provided significant advantages in chronic care management. Improvements in diabetes management, controlled hypertension and increases in tuberculosis vaccinations were assisted through the use of these open source systems. CONCLUSIONS: The flexibility and adaptability of open source EHR demonstrated its utility and viability in the provision of necessary and needed chronic disease care among populations served by CHC.