Alliance News2024-04-18T13:05:37-04:00

Congress Moves the Chess Pieces

Politico | October 28, 2016

Excerpt:

Krista Drobac, of the Alliance for Connected Care, also shared tempered enthusiasm about a “great first step” given the constraints Senate Finance staff faced. She vowed to bring more information on savings — we’re assuming this is another reference to the CBO-inspired budget doubts about telemedicine.

Read Here

November 3rd, 2016|

Alliance for Connected Care Letter to The Honorable Keith Hall

Download PDF
October 18th, 2016|

Telemonitoring Reduced Costs and Inpatient Visitation Rates for Patients with Advanced Cardiovascular Disease: A Matched Cohort Study Telemonitoring Reduced Costs and in-Patient Visitation Rates for Patients with Advanced Cardiovascularddisease

Telemonitoring Reduced Costs and Inpatient Visitation Rates for Patients with Advanced Cardiovascular Disease: A Matched Cohort Study Telemonitoring Reduced Costs and in-Patient Visitation Rates for Patients with Advanced Cardiovascularddisease

Introduction: Reducing the cost of care of patients with cardiovascular disease is an important target for integrated health systems. Managing these patients is difficult and costly, with commensurately high rates of inpatient (IP) visitation.

Hypothesis: Medical costs and IP visitation rates of patients receiving remote telemonitoring (TM) will decrease, relative to what they would have otherwise been.

Methods: We performed a concurrent matched cohort study, comparing patients receiving TM to those who did not. Our treatment cohort includes all members of Priority Health, Grand Rapids, MI (PH) that received TM between January 2012 and September 2013. Members of the treatment cohort were matched 1:1 against non-TM members of PH, indexed on the month of TM enrollment. Matching criteria includes age and sex; chronic morbidity status (heart failure, COPD, HTN, diabetes); observed medical costs 12 and 6 months prior to initiation of TM; and IP utilization within 12 months prior to initiation of TM. Members were excluded from treatment and putative control cohorts if they did not have continuous enrollment for 12 months prior and 24 months post initiation of TM. Endpoints include 24 month cumulative medical cost and IP visitations.

Results: We provide population-level metrics (Table) with 80% confidence intervals for endpoint differences and average cumulative cost and inpatient visitation curves (Figure) for our treatment and matched control cohorts.

Conclusions: Remote telemonitoring of patients with advanced cardiovascular disease can reduce inpatientvisitation rates, driving a reduction in medical costs. In this study, we estimate a visitation rate reduction of 4.9%, and a medical cost reduction of $13,608 over 24 months.

August 2nd, 2016|

Alliance Comments to MACRA Proposed Rule

Download PDF
June 27th, 2016|

Does telemedicine improve treatment outcomes for diabetes? A meta-analysis of results from 55 randomized controlled trials

Does telemedicine improve treatment outcomes for diabetes? A meta-analysis of results from 55 randomized controlled trials

Aims: To assess the overall effect of telemedicine on diabetes management and to identify features of telemedicine interventions that are associated with better diabetes management outcomes.

Methods: Hedges’s g was estimated as the summary measure of mean difference in HbA1c between patients with diabetes who went through telemedicine care and those who went through conventional, non-telemedicine care using a random-effects model. Q statistics were calculated to assess if the effect of telemedicine on diabetes management differs by types of diabetes, age groups of patients, duration of intervention, and primary telemedicine approaches used.

Results: The analysis included 55 randomized controlled trials with a total of 9258 patients with diabetes, out of which 4607 were randomized to telemedicine groups and 4651 to conventional, non-telemedicine care groups. The results favored telemedicine over conventional care (Hedges’s g=-0.48, p<0.001) in diabetes management. The beneficial effect of telemedicine were more pronounced among patients with type 2 diabetes (Hedges’s g=-0.63, p<0.001) than among those with type 1 diabetes (Hedges’s g=-0.27, p=0.027) (Q=4.25, p=0.04).

Conclusions: Compared to conventional care, telemedicine is more effective in improving treatment outcomes for diabetes patients, especially for those with type 2 diabetes.

June 1st, 2016|

Finally, a Chance for Telemedicine to Shine in Medicare and Medicaid

This past week was big for telemedicine in public programs.  Both telehealth and remote patient monitoring (RPM) are proven tools in the commercial marketplace, but reimbursement restrictions have made adoption in Medicare and Medicaid pretty close to non-existent.  It is still essential to pass legislation to fix outdated legal barriers in these programs.  However, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) created opportunities this week to demonstrate how valuable telehealth and RPM can be to the health care of millions of seniors and low-income Americans.

In the commercial market, telehealth is used for convenience and after-hours care that can substitute for more expensive and time consuming in-person options.  To date, RPM has largely been used to avoid hospital re-admissions and improve chronic disease management.  The new rules and programs released by CMS open the door to showing how these tools can help achieve the important goals of patient engagement, care coordination, expanded access to care and population health management driven by primary care providers.

Door #1: Comprehensive Primary Care + model (CPC+). This alternative payment model is aimed at supporting primary care practitioners in delivering “advanced” primary care. It is a multi-payer initiative that will impact up to 3.5 million Medicare FFS beneficiaries, as well as millions of other Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, and commercial patients.

Primary care practitioners will be paid a non-visit based, risk-adjusted per beneficiary per month (PBPM) care management fee to help ensure services are “accessible, responsive to an individual’s preference, and patients can take advantage of enhanced in-person hours and 24/7 telephone or electronic access.”

Practices must also ensure that care is “coordinated across the health care system,” patients receive “timely” follow-up after emergency room or hospital visits and that care is “patient-centered.” Telemedicine achieves all of these goals. Since primary care practices will receive a care management fee, they have flexibility on where they can make their investments. That funding won’t be subject to the legal restrictions around telehealth or the lack of payment for RPM.

Door #2: Medicaid and CHIP Managed Care Rule. The final rule allows telemedicine to be used to meet network adequacy requirements in Medicaid. Before this rule, Medicaid managed care network adequacy regulation relied heavily on attestations and certifications from states. Now, states will have to develop time and distance standards and hold managed care plans accountable. Given how difficult it can be to find medical practitioners willing to accept Medicaid, telemedicine will be important to ensuring compliance with network adequacy.

Door #3: Medicare and CHIP Access and Re-authorization Act (MACRA) proposed rule. CMS moves physicians, nurses and other practitioners into value-based care by measuring care in four categories– quality, cost (new resource use), clinical practice improvement activities, and advancing care information (new meaningful use). The alternative is moving into an “advanced alternative payment model.” Telehealth figures prominently in assisting practitioners fulfill clinical practice improvement activities.  It is mentioned explicitly as a way to expand practice access and manage patients who receive the drug warfarin. The tools can also apply in meeting practice improvement activities in the population management, patient engagement and care coordination categories. Also, telehealth services are categorized as “patient facing.”

The possibilities for more adoption in Medicare and Medicaid through these avenues is exciting.  However, billing for telehealth and RPM services in Medicare and Medicaid remains difficult.  We still need legislation to update the statute governing the these programs, but CMS’s efforts using existing authority are a step in the right direction.

May 2nd, 2016|

Letter to Andy Slavitt, Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

Download PDF
March 15th, 2016|

Effectiveness of Remote Patient Monitoring After Discharge of Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure: The Better Effectiveness After Transition — Heart Failure (BEAT-HF) Randomized Clinical Trial

Effectiveness of Remote Patient Monitoring After Discharge of Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure: The Better Effectiveness After Transition — Heart Failure (BEAT-HF) Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: It remains unclear whether telemonitoring approaches provide benefits for patients with heart failure (HF) after hospitalization.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of a care transition intervention using remote patient monitoring in reducing 180-day all-cause readmissions among a broad population of older adults hospitalized with HF.

Design, setting, and participants: We randomized 1437 patients hospitalized for HF between October 12, 2011, and September 30, 2013, to the intervention arm (715 patients) or to the usual care arm (722 patients) of the Better Effectiveness After Transition-Heart Failure (BEAT-HF) study and observed them for 180 days. The dates of our study analysis were March 30, 2014, to October 1, 2015. The setting was 6 academic medical centers in California. Participants were hospitalized individuals 50 years or older who received active treatment for decompensated HF.

Interventions: The intervention combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring. Telemonitoring used electronic equipment that collected daily information about blood pressure, heart rate, symptoms, and weight. Centralized registered nurses conducted telemonitoring reviews, protocolized actions, and telephone calls.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was readmission for any cause within 180 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were all-cause readmission within 30 days, all-cause mortality at 30 and 180 days, and quality of life at 30 and 180 days.

Results: Among 1437 participants, the median age was 73 years. Overall, 46.2% (664 of 1437) were female, and 22.0% (316 of 1437) were African American. The intervention and usual care groups did not differ significantly in readmissions for any cause 180 days after discharge, which occurred in 50.8% (363 of 715) and 49.2% (355 of 722) of patients, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20; P = .74). In secondary analyses, there were no significant differences in 30-day readmission or 180-day mortality, but there was a significant difference in 180-day quality of life between the intervention and usual care groups. No adverse events were reported.

Conclusions and relevance: Among patients hospitalized for HF, combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring did not reduce 180-day readmissions.

March 1st, 2016|

Finally, a Real Chance for Change in Medicare Related to Telehealth & Remote Monitoring

February 3, 2016 | Krista Drobac, Executive Director of the Alliance for Connected Care

Today represents the first real chance we have had to change Medicare payment policy for telehealth and remote patient monitoring. While the commercial market adopts these tools at a rapid rate, there is virtually no access for seniors in Medicare. This issue got a powerful boost this morning with the introduction of the CONNECT for Health Act in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives.

Six bipartisan U.S. Senators, including three Committee chairman, and four U.S. Representatives on committees of jurisdiction, came together to introduce a bill that has been endorsed by more than 50 groups, including AARP, the American Medical Association, America’s Health Insurance Plans, the American Heart Association and more.

The CONNECT for Health Act, which is led in the Senate by Senators Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Roger Wicker (R-MS), and in the House by Representatives Diane Black (R-TN) and Peter Welch (D-VT), is a measured approach that lifts Medicare’s outdated restrictions on the use of telehealth, provides resources for remote patient monitoring technology for patients with chronic conditions, ensures new payment models will include these tools, makes these technologies part of Medicare Advantage, and addresses specific challenges related to stroke and dialysis.

Telehealth and remote monitoring are important for achieving the goals of value-based care, providing more access to primary care and behavioral health, improving chronic care management and advancing patient engagement. Patients with commercial coverage have access to these tools through their employers, health plans or health system. The evidence from their usage proves that telehealth and remote monitoring can move our health care system toward better care at lower costs.

According to an independent analysis from Avalere Health, the CONNECT for Health Act will decrease federal spending by $1.8 billion over the next ten-year period. In addition, the study estimates an immediate impact improving patient access with nearly 8.2 million Medicare beneficiaries receiving telemedicine and remote patient monitoring services through a demonstration waiver program by 2017.

It is long overdue for Congress to modernize care and access for all Medicare beneficiaries.

February 3rd, 2016|
Go to Top