Category: Telehealth

Telehealth Only Effective For Some Conditions

Posted on by Jason Barry

New research out of the University of Texas added to the growing body of evidence that indicates telehealth’s promise of lower costs and utilization isn’t as straightforward as it appears – especially for certain types of diseases. 

Researchers looked at patient visits across all hospital-based outpatient clinics in Maryland from 2012 to 2021, finding that virtual visits reduced the overall number of 30-day follow-ups by 13.6%, bringing down costs by $239 per patient.

Patients with behavioral health, skin, metabolic, and musculoskeletal disorders saw an even greater 19% reduction in follow-ups (an equivalent cost reduction of $179), suggesting that virtual care serves as a true substitute to office visits.

  • Telehealth was also associated with a significant reduction in ER and specialist visits among patients in this category.
  • The common thread between those conditions is what the researchers coined as “high virtualization potential,” or the ability for physicians to effectively measure symptoms over telehealth.

The flip side of that coin is that conditions with “low virtualization potential” saw nearly zero benefit from virtual care in terms of lowering costs, follow-ups, or future ER visits.

  • These included circulatory, respiratory, and infectious diseases, where symptoms are difficult to observe over video and harder for patients to communicate.

These findings double down on the results from Epic Research’s study earlier this month, which found that 16 of the 24 specialties analyzed had fewer follow-ups after an initial telehealth visit.

  • That study saw nearly identical overlap with behavioral health and MSK, which both saw a 20%+ reduction in follow-ups after telehealth. Podiatry, OBGYN, and ophthalmology were the greatest exceptions, in line with the “low virtualization potential” theme.

The Takeaway

The difference in telehealth’s effectiveness between conditions caused the study authors to reach the conclusion that virtual care should be promoted in clinical areas where it is most beneficial, but it seems like there might be a bigger takeaway for our audience: There’s a huge need for innovative remote examination solutions, and circulatory, respiratory, and infectious diseases are a great place to start.

Trends Shaping the Health Economy: Behavioral Health

Posted on by Jason Barry

Trilliant Health published a new report that’s pretty close to required reading for anyone working in behavioral healthcare – Trends Shaping the Health Economy: Behavioral Health.

The report does a thorough job wrapping numbers around the biggest trend in the space: patient demand is outpacing the supply of providers.

  • Behavioral health volumes were 18.1% above pre-pandemic levels by Q2 2022, driven by a combination of stress-induced disorders and a 45X increase in telehealth utilization. Behavioral health visits accounted for 63.8% of total telehealth visits in Q2 2022.
  • Since 2019, the conditions that saw the sharpest rise in visit volumes were eating disorders (up 52.6%), anxiety (47.9%), substance-use disorders (27.4%), depression (24.4%), and bipolar disorder (12.2%).
  • Unlike many other areas of healthcare, behavioral health doesn’t appear to be a small group of high utilizers driving up volumes. In 2021, two-thirds of patients diagnosed with a mental health condition saw a provider five times or fewer.

Although telehealth was initially viewed as a way to expand access to therapy, the data paints a different picture of its actual impact. More prescriptions, treatments shifting away from behavioral health providers, and lackluster follow-up care.

  • The share of patients with a prescription for antidepressants increased 15% from 2017 to 2021, while patients ages 22-44 saw Adderall prescriptions spike 58.2%.
  • PCPs now prescribe the greatest share of behavioral health medications (42.3%), and NPs and PAs have also begun to account for a large share of prescribing volume (22%). Behavioral health providers account for just over a third of total prescribing volume.
  • Most patients initially diagnosed by their PCP with schizophrenia (70.2%) or bipolar disorder (62.8%) received subsequent treatment from a behavioral health provider, but the same was true for only 30.3% of ADHD patients.

The Takeaway

Trilliant’s data provides a strong foundation to start asking the right questions about the direction behavioral healthcare is heading.

  • Should high demand shift care settings for behavioral healthcare?
  • Should primary care be the first line of defense?
  • If PCPs are delivering this care, is more training needed to manage these conditions?
  • Is this the proper balance between therapy and medication?

While Trilliant’s report isn’t setting out to answer these questions, it’s a valuable tool for those that are.

Telehealth Rarely Requires In-Person Follow-Ups

Posted on by Jason Barry

Epic Research tied a nice ribbon on the end of 2022 with a study suggesting that telehealth is an efficient use of resources for most specialties, rarely requiring an in-person follow-up within 90 days.

The research appears to indicate that telehealth isn’t usually duplicative of in-person visits, adding weight to the argument that regulators should view it as an alternative, rather than an additional encounter.

After examining over 35M telehealth visits conducted between March 2020 and May 2022, Epic Research found a pretty wide spread between specialties for both the number of telehealth visits and in-person follow-up percentages.

The main finding was that high follow-up rates were present only in specialties that require regular in-person visits for hands-on care, such as obstetrics and surgery. 

  • Mental health and psychiatry had the highest telehealth utilization and some of the lowest need for in-person follow-up. No surprises there.
  • Only 15% of telemental health visits needed an in-person follow-up within the next three months.
  • On the opposite end of the spectrum, obstetrics (92%), fertility (54%), and geriatrics (50%) had the highest need for in-person follow-ups.
  • In specialties that could be consultations (e.g. genetics, nutrition), the researchers stated that telehealth might even replace the need for in-person visits.

The Takeaway

While the numbers certainly look good for telehealth at first glance, the pandemic itself might be doing them a lot of favors.

Many medical offices closed at the beginning of the study period, and most didn’t reopen to in-person appointments for several months. Plenty of patients also remain wary of in-person visits due to the risk of virus exposure. Both factors probably skewed the in-person follow-ups to a lower range.

Those details aside, Epic Research gave a great overview of in-person follow-up needs by specialty, and the more data we can wrap around telehealth’s impact the better.

Telehealth Startups Sharing Patient Data

Posted on by Jason Barry

An absolute firework show of a joint report between STAT and The Markup cast a spotlight on telehealth companies sharing sensitive patient information with advertisers, and it definitely wasn’t a good look for some of the biggest names in the space. 

Over the past few months, STAT and The Markup created accounts and completed onboarding forms on 50 telehealth sites (most major players, notably excluding Teladoc/BetterHelp), then tracked what data was being shared with advertisers such as Google, Facebook, and TikTok.

Of the 50 telehealth websites analyzed, advertisers received information from:

  • URLs users visited – 49 sites
  • Personal info (name, email, phone) – 35 sites
  • When user initiated checkout – 19 sites
  • User’s answers to questionnaires – 13 sites
  • When user added to cart – 11 sites
  • When user created an account – 9 sites

Yikes. One of the stats that stands out the most is the fact that 13 of the websites shared patients’ answers to medical intake questions, such as their migraine frequency or substance use history. All but one of the sites shared the URLs that users visited – gold star for Amazon Clinic – but most of the websites shared information with multiple advertisers. 

Here’s how many of the sites shared data with each advertiser:

  • Google – 47 sites
  • Facebook – 44 sites 
  • TikTok – 23 sites
  • Snapchat – 15 sites
  • LinkedIn – 9 sites
  • Twitter – 7 sites

You can find the full list of telehealth platforms and the information they shared roughly a third of the way down the report, and the authors were even kind enough to provide a cringe worthy round up of each company’s response. 

The Takeaway

Telehealth companies often act as middlemen between the patients and providers covered under HIPAA, rather than delivering care themselves, which results in limited protections for the sensitive information they collect.

Most patients probably assume that their health data is always protected, and many of them turn to online solutions for more privacy in the first place. The end of STAT and The Markup’s report included thousands of words from privacy experts and regulators, nearly all of them agreeing that protections like HIPAA need to be reformed for the telehealth era.

Only protecting sensitive information in certain settings is clearly starting to feel out of step with the times, especially when advertisers have the answers to your health intake forms.

Teladoc Reports Strong Q3 on BetterHelp Performance

Posted on by Jason Barry

Teladoc’s third quarter earnings report is in, and it’s looking like the company might finally be hitting its stride on its path toward profitability.

On its investor call, Teladoc told the only story that Wall Street wants to hear: cost management efforts and gross margins are both improving. The narrative helped push Teladoc’s stock up over 20% last week, although its $5B market cap still has a ways to go before getting back to its $45B peak.

Teladoc’s third quarter, by the numbers: 

  • Revenue of $611.4M, up 17% year-over-year
  • Net loss of $73.5M, earnings per share of -$0.45
  • Gross margin of 69.6%
  • Ended the quarter with 57.8M US members, up 10% year-over-year

CEO Jason Gorevic called out four main drivers behind Teladoc’s better than expected Q3 revenue, but its BetterHelp mental health business was definitely a standout.

  • BetterHelp grew over 35% compared to Q3 2021 and it’s now hitting a run rate of $1B annually. 
  • The direct-to-consumer mental health platform was specifically called out for contributing to Teladoc’s gross margin improvement, and its previously reported poor returns on advertising have begun to stabilize.
  • The efficiency gains were primarily due to higher utilization of group therapy sessions and the pivot away from a purely contractor model toward a hybrid model with more full-time employees.
  • Gorevic noted that next year’s outlook for BetterHelp depends in large part on macroeconomic conditions that could cause consumers to tighten their purse strings.

Other highlights from the quarter included 9% membership growth for Chronic Care Complete (now at 791k members), an expanded partnership with HCSC to bring Teladoc’s solution suite to employer groups, and high satisfaction among Primary360 users.

  • It was interesting that Teladoc stuck to NPS scores and some general utilization stats when discussing Primary360, and it’s probably telling that the actual membership count wasn’t deemed noteworthy.

The Takeaway

By all accounts Teladoc delivered a solid third quarter, and the margin improvement stemming from BetterHelp was music to shareholders’ ears. Despite the strong report, Teladoc lowered its full-year guidance to ~$2.4B in revenue, but even that was taken as good news by investors who viewed it as setting up an achievable growth target.

Telehealth Flexibilities Reduced Opioid Overdoses

Posted on by Jason Barry

A new study in JAMA Psychiatry attracted a lot of attention last week after finding that pandemic-era telehealth flexibilities significantly lowered the odds of medically treated opioid overdoses among Medicare patients.

Researchers from the CDC, CMS, and NIDA examined data from Medicare beneficiaries with a prior diagnosis for opioid use disorder (OUD), separating them into a pandemic cohort of 71k patients who initiated OUD care after telehealth flexibilities were expanded and 105k who sought treatment prior to the onset of the pandemic.

The differences between the two groups were stark: 

  • Roughly 1 in 8 beneficiaries in the pandemic group received OUD-related telehealth services, compared with just 1 in 800 in the prepandemic group.
  • The expanded access to treatment helped 12.6% of pandemic beneficiaries obtain medications for OUD (e.g. methadone, buprenorphine, naltrexone), compared with 10.8% of the prepandemic group. 
  • The pandemic cohort saw significantly lower odds of medically treated overdose (odds ratio: 0.67), as well as higher medication retention (OR: 1.27).
  • Pandemic beneficiaries were also far more likely to access virtual behavioral health services than the prepandemic group (41% vs. 1.9%).

The Takeaway

The study served as a boon to telehealth advocacy groups, which have been pushing to make pandemic-era telehealth flexibilities a permanent fixture. The American Telemedicine Association pretty much summed it up in their press release, touting the study as “a strong signal to policymakers that telehealth can and should be a permanent part of healthcare delivery.”

Teladoc’s Q2 Brings $3.1B Livongo Write Down

Posted on by Jason Barry

Teladoc shareholders can’t seem to catch a break, with the company’s second quarter results sending its shares plummeting 20% on the back of a heavy earnings miss and weak guidance for the second half of the year.

The telehealth services provider reported 18% revenue growth to $592.4M for the period, but the headline grabber from the announcement was a $3B impairment charge on its Livongo acquisition that drove a total loss of $3.1B.

Teladoc CEO Jason Gorevic shared some upbeat growth metrics on the conference call with investors, but also called out a number of headwinds that make it difficult to predict near-term performance.

  • Chronic care membership came in higher than expected, while member utilization improved year-over-year.
  • Teladoc’s BetterHelp virtual therapy business grew revenue by 40%, but continued to be hindered by competitors sacrificing margin to gain market share
  • Primary360 has been “a significant bright spot” for commercial momentum, but heightened economic uncertainty is delaying the decision making process in the employer market.
  • Teladoc is taking a look at its cost structure to maintain profitability, and will begin marketing bundles of services to expand its revenue sources.

The Takeaway
Although the market didn’t exactly react kindly to the Livongo news, the write down appears to be more of a symptom of wider market trends than the business itself, and Teladoc’s recently launched Chronic Care Complete solution is poised to be a core pillar of its long-term growth strategy. The near-term looks like a different story, as Teladoc now expects its full-year revenue to be at the lower end of its $2.4B to $2.5B guidance.

CVS Health Announces Virtual Primary Care

Posted on by Jason Barry

CVS Health’s push into omnichannel care delivery continued last week with its new Virtual Primary Care solution geared towards connecting the company’s clinical expertise and patient data on a single digital platform.

CVS Health Virtual Primary Care will provide eligible Aetna and CVS Caremark members with access to on-demand primary care, chronic condition management, and mental health services in either virtual or in-person settings.

  • The service’s physician-led care teams include nurse practitioners, RNs, and licensed vocational nurses. The care team will consult CVS pharmacists and help members identify appropriate in-network specialists and other services as needed.
  • An interoperable EHR will help patients transition between virtual and in-person care while allowing clinical data to be shared with other providers. A comprehensive data view will also enable providers to deliver personalized health alerts to patients.

The new program aims to enable timely access to care, and CVS cites reports that it currently takes 24 days to schedule an appointment with a primary care physician and twice that long to see a mental health professional.

  • Although the press release doesn’t go into too much detail on how CVS plans to staff the program, an active job listing for a virtual primary care provider indicates that they’re hiring two PCPs to cover the entire 17-state central US region.
  • If that ratio holds through next year’s launch it would suggest that CVS isn’t expecting significant patient volume through the platform, although it’s still early to make that call.

The Takeaway
The Virtual Primary Care launch continues CVS Health’s recent string of service enhancements designed to help it move beyond its corner drugstore image, including reimagining its stores as healthcare destinations and a strategic data partnership with Microsoft. The move also bolsters CVS Health’s overall care delivery strategy at a time when one of its most direct competitors, Walgreens, is doubling down on primary care by taking an ownership stake in VillageMD to streamline the launch of at least 700 connected clinics by 2027.

Measuring Telehealth Outcomes During the Pandemic

Posted on by Jason Barry

Since the beginning of the pandemic, few studies have investigated the association of telehealth with outcomes of care, including patterns of care use after the initial encounter. New research published in JAMA Network Open set out to do just that, using a cohort of 40.7M US adults with commercial health coverage to examine the difference in outcomes between telehealth versus in-person encounters.

The study assessed Blue Cross and Blue Shield members from July 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020. Outcomes of care were assessed 14 days after initial encounters and included follow-up encounters of any kind, ED visits, and hospitalizations.

The key finding of the study was that telehealth has the potential to result in duplicative care, depending largely on the patient’s condition type. Telehealth patients with acute conditions were more likely to have a follow-up encounter than in-person patients, while telehealth patients with chronic conditions were less likely to require follow-up. 

In the cohort with acute conditions, the odds ratios for patients with an initial telehealth encounter were 1.44 for a follow-up of any kind and 1.11 for an ED encounter.

  • Ex: Patients with an acute upper respiratory tract infection episode were 65% more likely to have a follow-up if their initial encounter was a telehealth visit, compared to in-person.

The chronic condition cohort showed contrasting results, with odds ratios of 0.94 for follow-ups of any kind if the initial encounter was via telehealth.

  • Ex: Patients with essential hypertension were 37% less likely to have a follow-up if their initial encounter was a telehealth visit, compared to in-person.

For those that like to dive into the data, this table breaks down patterns of subsequent care by the clinical condition.  

The Takeaway

The contrasting patterns of telehealth follow-up care for acute and chronic conditions are relevant to both policy makers and providers. Telehealth use for the management of chronic conditions appears comparable, or even more efficient, than in-person care, with the opposite looking true for acute conditions. This trend was strongest for acute respiratory infections, but that also feels like a pretty natural result for a study conducted during a respiratory-related pandemic.

The Telehealth Era Is Just Beginning

Posted on by Jason Barry

“The Telehealth Era Is Just Beginning” is a fitting title for the bullish stance on virtual care featured in this month’s issue of the Harvard Business Review. Although we cover plenty of articles outlining the benefits of telehealth, this piece was penned by a pair of especially qualified authors: former chief executive of the Permanente Medical Group, Robert Pearl, and Intermountain Healthcare’s executive director of telehealth services, Brian Wayling.

Pearl and Wayling shared an extensive deep dive on several key areas where telehealth can have a positive impact. It’s worth the read if you have 30 minutes and a big cup of coffee, but the key points are outlined here for those in search of the condensed takeaways.

Reducing unnecessary trips to the ER was the first focus area, due in large part to the heightened medical risks created by ER physicians frequently lacking access to patient EHR data and the low likelihood of follow-up care.

  • Kaiser Permanente addresses these issues by providing members with a telehealth center with physicians that can solve the problem and coordinate any follow-ups in 60% of cases, preventing unnecessary ER visits.

Reversing the chronic disease crisis was the second use case highlighted, with telehealth providing a better way to serve the 50% of US hypertension patients living with an elevated risk of complications due to poor management of the condition.

  • Pearl reported that KP consistently achieves a blood pressure control rate above 90% by replacing traditional office visits with EHR-connected blood pressure cuffs and virtual check-ins, enabling more frequent disease measurement and timeliness of treatment.

Other interesting examples revolved around improving access to specialty care and reducing geographical barriers to treatment, which help eliminate misdiagnosis and long wait times for patients with rare conditions.

  • Wayling laid out how Intermountain’s Neuro Fast Access Clinical Team virtual platform allows low-acuity patients to receive remote migraine treatment from an expert, which opens up clinical time for patients who require in-person care.

How to Spur Adoption

While these case studies are useful for anyone looking to replicate the success of KP and Intermountain at their own health systems, the article saves its most valuable information for last, exploring two changes required to usher in “the telehealth era.”

  • Integration – The organizations that consistently rank highest on quality are large multispecialty medical groups that leverage technology to coordinate care. As more doctors opt to work within health systems, they’ll be able to take advantage of shared EHRs, cross-specialty communication, and virtual care to help patients in ways unavailable to physicians in solo practice.
  • Value-Based Care – Doctors who are incentivized based on the quantity of services they provide will logically resist models that reduce specialty referrals and hospital admissions. It’s easier for KP and Intermountain to say this, but telehealth’s full benefits will only be realized after more organizations adopt value-based structures that promote the use of virtual care to create superior outcomes.

For best results, Pearl and Wayling suggest implementing value-based models within integrated organizations, driving the point home with a final example of how two large health systems (good luck guessing which ones) are finding success with this strategy.

Get the top digital health stories right in your inbox

You might also like..

Select All

You're signed up!

It's great to have you as a reader. Check your inbox for a welcome email.

-- The Digital Health Wire team

You're all set!