Use of and Attitudes About Telelactation Services among New Parents.

Background: We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey among new parents to explore use and acceptability of telelactation. Methods: Recruitment occurred between October 2021 and January 2022 on Ovia's parenting mobile phone application. Poststratification survey weights were used, and logistic and linear regression models estimated associations between demographics and telelactation use. Results: Among 1,617 respondents, 33.8% had at least one telelactation visit. Odds of any telelactation visit(s) were greater for parents who gave birth in 2021 versus 2019 (odds ratio [OR]: 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26-2.25), insured by Medicaid (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.02-2.02), and younger parents (OR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.32-3.34). In total, 56.0% agreed that they would be comfortable breastfeeding over video to get help, and 27.6% agreed that lactation support over video is as good as in-person support. Conclusions: Telelactation is increasingly common and acceptable to many parents.

Telepractice in the Treatment of Speech and Voice Disorders: What Could the Future Look Like?

Purpose: There is an ongoing technological revolution in the clinical tools used by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) to care for patients. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the pace of change and the shift to telepractice. Tele-practice will continue to play a large role after the pandemic, but it is unclear what the future may look like. Our goal is to give SLPs an overview of how recent technological innovations may enhance synchronous treatment, enable asynchronous treatment, and broadly modify traditional clinical practice patterns while the patient spends less time in the clinic. Conclusions: Newer telepractice tools such as remote patient monitoring, digital phenotyping, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence may improve the therapeutic process by addressing the shortage of SLPs and the transition of therapy practices to the real world. We also highlight key barriers to this future, including lack of rigorous trials of advanced technologies and state licensure regulations.

Antibiotic Receipt During Outpatient Visits for COVID-19 in the US, From 2020 to 2022.

This cross-sectional study examines prescribed and filled antibiotics for outpatient COVID-19 treatment among children, adolescents, and adults with commercial insurance.

Patient Characteristics Associated With Being Offered or Choosing Telephone vs Video Virtual Visits Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: After the rapid expansion of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is debate about the role and reimbursement of telephone vs video visits. Missing is an understanding of what type of virtual visits clinicians may offer or patients may choose when given the option. Objective: To evaluate characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries associated with practices and clinicians offering telephone visits only and patients receiving telephone visits only, when both telephone and video were available. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used 2019-2020 nationally representative Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data. Participants included community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of medical care who attended a practice offering telemedicine. Data were analyzed from May 3 to August 23, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify patient sociodemographic (age, sex, race, ethnicity, educational level, income, English proficiency, housing type, and number living at home), clinical (dementia, mental illness, self-rated health, hearing impairment, and vision impairment), and technology (technology access and prior use of video visits) factors associated with respondents' report of (1) practices offering telephone virtual visits only, (2) being offered telephone visits only when both video and telephone visits were available, and (3) receiving telephone visits only when both video and telephone visits were offered. Results: Of 4691 respondents (representing 27 887 642 Medicare beneficiaries; mean [SD] age, 71.3[8.1] years; 55.0% female) reporting that their practice offered telemedicine, 1234 (23.3% weighted) reported that their practices offered telephone virtual visits only; factors associated with being in a practice offering telephone only included older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.62 [95% CI, 1.10-2.39] for those aged ≥85 years vs 18-64 years), male sex (aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.12-1.64]), Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.03-1.95]), lower income (aOR, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.43-2.49] for those with income ≤100% vs >200% of the federal poverty level), poor self-rated health (aOR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.01-1.56]), and less technology access (aOR, 2.05 [95% CI, 1.61-2.60] for those with low vs high access). Of the 1593 patients in practices offering both video and telephone visits, 297 (16.7% weighted) were themselves offered telephone visits only; factors associated with being offered telephone only included Hispanic ethnicity (aOR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.13-3.41]), limited English proficiency (aOR, 3.05 [95% CI, 1.28-7.31]), and less technology access (aOR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.00-2.81] for those with low vs high access). Finally, of the 711 respondents who were themselves offered both video and telephone visits, 304 (43.1% weighted) had a telephone visit; factors associated with receiving telephone visits only were older age (aOR, 2.68 [95% CI, 1.21-5.92] for those aged 75-84 years vs 18-64 years) and less technology access (aOR, 2.65 [95% CI, 1.12-6.25] for those with moderate vs high access]). Among those who used video calls in other settings and were offered a choice, 122 (28.5%, weighted) chose telephone visits. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of Medicare beneficiaries, respondents often reported being offered or choosing telephone visits even when video visits were available. Study findings suggest that policy makers and clinical leaders should support the use of telephone visits to the extent that telephone is appropriate, while addressing both practice-level and patient-level barriers to video visits.

Video Telemedicine Experiences In COVID-19 Were Positive, But Physicians And Patients Prefer In-Person Care For The Future.

To help inform policy discussions about postpandemic telemedicine reimbursement and regulations, we conducted dual nationally representative surveys among primary care physicians and patients. Although majorities of both populations reported satisfaction with video visits during the pandemic, 80 percent of physicians would prefer to provide only a small share of care or no care via telemedicine in the future, and only 36 percent of patients would prefer to seek care by video or phone. Most physicians (60 percent) felt that the quality of video telemedicine care was generally inferior to the quality of in-person care, and both patients and physicians cited the lack of physical exam as a key reason (90 percent and 92 percent, respectively). Patients who were older, had less education, or were Asian were less likely to want to use video for future care. Although improvements to home-based diagnostic tools could improve both the quality of and the desire to use telemedicine, virtual primary care will likely be limited in the immediate future. Policies to enhance quality, sustain virtual care, and address inequities in the online setting may be needed.

Variation in patterns of telestroke usage during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: Early in the pandemic, there was a substantial increase in telestroke uptake among hospitals. The motivations for using telestroke during the pandemic might have been different than for hospitals that adopted telestroke previously. We compared stroke care at hospitals that adopted telestroke prior to the pandemic to care at hospitals that adopted telestroke during the pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stroke episodes and telestroke use were identified in Medicare Fee-for-Service Data. Hospital and episode characteristics were compared between pre-pandemic (Jan. 2019-Mar. 2020) and pandemic (Apr. 2020-Dec. 2020) adopters. RESULTS: Hospital bed counts, critical access statuses, stroke volumes, clinical operating margins, shares of stroke care via telestroke, and vascular neurology consult rates did not differ significantly between pre-pandemic and pandemic-adopting hospitals. Hospitals that never adopted telestroke during the study period were more likely to be small critical access hospitals with low clinical operating margins. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to hospitals that adopted telestroke before the pandemic, hospitals that adopted telestroke during the pandemic were similar in characteristics and how they used telestroke.

Appropriateness of Telemedicine Versus In-Person Care: A Qualitative Exploration of Psychiatrists' Decision Making.

OBJECTIVE: With widespread adoption of telemedicine in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, psychiatrists must determine which visits are best conducted via telemedicine versus in person. Although some telepsychiatry guidelines and best practices have been developed, the literature has not described how psychiatrists make decisions about offering different care modalities. The authors explored how psychiatrists decide whether telemedicine is appropriate for a given patient. METHODS: From June 25 to August 4, 2021, the authors conducted semistructured interviews with 20 outpatient psychiatrists. The authors used a critical incident technique and clinical vignettes to identify conscious and unconscious factors that influence psychiatrists' decision to offer telemedicine. Using inductive thematic analysis, the authors analyzed interview data. RESULTS: Psychiatrists perceived that most patients are good candidates for telemedicine visits in the context of hybrid care models. Patient preference and situational factors, such as access to private spaces, rather than any particular diagnosis or patient demographic characteristic, drove telemedicine versus in-person care. Psychiatrists described numerous factors affecting their decision to offer telemedicine, and they were driven to try telemedicine and adjust as needed to "meet patients where they are" and to improve engagement in care. Psychiatrists reported using telemedicine as a bargaining chip in negotiations with patients, leveraging the offer of telemedicine to improve treatment attendance and adherence. CONCLUSIONS: This detailed assessment of how psychiatrists choose different care modalities can inform clinical practice guidelines and reimbursement policies that often mandate in-person visits. The results show that psychiatrists did not perceive intermittent in-person visits as essential for high-quality care.

Telemedicine Visits to Children During the Pandemic: Practice-Based Telemedicine Versus Telemedicine-Only Providers.

OBJECTIVE: In March 2020, regulatory and payment changes allowed "brick and mortar" pediatric practices to offer practice-based telemedicine for the first time, joining direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine vendors in the ability to offer visits for common acute pediatric concerns via telemedicine. We sought to characterize the relative contribution of practice-based telemedicine versus commercial DTC telemedicine models in provision of children's telemedicine from 2018 through 2021. METHODS: Using January 2018 to September 2021 data from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database, we identified telemedicine visits by children ≤17, excluding preventive visits and visits to specialists, emergency departments, and urgent care. Among included visits, we defined "telemedicine-only" providers as those with ≥80% of visits via telemedicine and practice-based telemedicine providers as those with ≤50% of visits via telemedicine. We then described the telemedicine visit volume and diagnoses for these categories overall and per 1000 children per month. RESULTS: From January 2018 to February 2020, telemedicine-only providers accounted for 57,815 telemedicine visits (90.8%), while practice-based telemedicine accounted for 4192 telemedicine visits (6.6%). From March 2020 to September 2021, telemedicine-only providers accounted for 38,282 telemedicine visits (6.1%), while practice-based telemedicine accounted for 555,125 telemedicine visits (88.2%). Per month, telemedicine visits to practice-based telemedicine providers increased from pre-pandemic to pandemic periods (0.1 vs 12.9 visits per 1000 children/month), while telemedicine visits to telemedicine-only providers occurred at a similar rate from pre-pandemic to pandemic periods (0.92 vs 0.96 visits per 1000 children/month). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a large increase in telemedicine visits during the pandemic, with the growth in visits exclusively occurring among visits to practice-based telemedicine providers as opposed to telemedicine-only providers.

Variation in Patterns of Telestroke Usage during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives Early in the pandemic there was a substantial increase in telestroke uptake among hospitals. The motivations for using telestroke during the pandemic might be different than hospitals that adopted telestroke previously. We compared stroke care among hospitals that adopted telestroke prior to the pandemic to hospitals that adopted telestroke during the pandemic. Materials and Methods Stroke episodes and telestroke use were identified in Medicare Fee-for-Service Data. Hospital and episode characteristics were compared between pre-pandemic (Jan. 2019 – Mar. 2020) and pandemic (Apr. 2020 – Dec. 2020) adopters. Results Hospital bed counts, critical access status, stroke volumes, clinical operating margins, share of stroke care via telestroke, and vascular neurology consult rates did not differ significantly between pre-pandemic and pandemic-adopting hospitals. Hospitals that never adopted telestroke during the study period were more likely to be small critical access hospitals with low clinical operating margins. Conclusions Compared to hospitals that adopted telestroke before the pandemic, hospitals that adopted telestroke during the pandemic were similar in characteristics and how they used telestroke.

Telemedicine Use and Quality of Opioid Use Disorder Treatment in the US During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Little is known about the potential implications of the rapid transition to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic for treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). Objective: To examine the association between telemedicine adoption during the COVID-19 pandemic and indicators of OUD treatment quality. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed deidentified administrative claims data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Claims for telemedicine visits were included for both the prepandemic period (March 14, 2019, to March 13, 2020) and pandemic period (March 14, 2020, to March 13, 2021). Patients with OUD and continuous enrollment in either commercial insurance or Medicare Advantage plans were included. Clinicians who provided office-based OUD care were included and categorized into low, medium, or high telemedicine use groups. Patients were attributed to the clinician (and corresponding telemedicine use group) from whom they received a plurality of OUD visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 4 outcomes were all outpatient visits, OUD visits (in person vs telemedicine) within 90 days of an index visit, medications for OUD (MOUD) prescribing, and OUD-related clinical events (including drug overdose, inpatient detoxification and rehabilitation center stay, or injection drug use-related infections). Results: The analysis included 11 801 patients (mean [SD] age, 53.9 [15.7] years; 5902 males [50.0%]) who were treated by 1768 clinicians. Clinicians with low vs high telemedicine use conducted a mean (SD) of 2.1% (2.5%) vs 69.5% (18.6%) of their office visits virtually in the pandemic period. While telemedicine use for OUD increased significantly from the prepandemic to pandemic periods, total OUD visit volume (in person plus telemedicine) per patient episode remained stable among both high (2.6 to 2.7 visits per patient episode) and low (3.1 to 3.3 visits per patient episode) telemedicine use groups. In adjusted analyses comparing the prepandemic with pandemic periods, there was no differential change in MOUD initiation (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.19), MOUD days' supply (differential change in days' supply, -0.27; 95% CI, -1.84 to 1.30), or OUD-related clinical events (adjusted OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.73-1.24) among patients who were treated by clinicians in low vs high telemedicine use groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study revealed that clinical outcomes were similar among patients who were treated by clinicians with high and low telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that telemedicine is a comparable alternative to in-person OUD care. There was no evidence that telemedicine was associated with increased access to or improved quality of OUD treatment.

A cohort study examining changes in treatment patterns for alcohol use disorder among commercially insured adults in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: We know very little about how the pandemic impacted outpatient alcohol use disorder (AUD) care and the role of telemedicine. METHODS: Using OptumLabs® Data Warehouse de-identified administrative claims, we identified AUD cohorts in 2018 (N = 23,204) and 2019 (N = 23,445) and examined outpatient visits the following year, focusing on week 12, corresponding to the March 2020 US COVID-19 emergency declaration, through week 52. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined the association between patient demographic and clinical characteristics and receipt of any outpatient AUD visits in 2020 vs. 2019. RESULTS: In 2020, weekly AUD visit utilization decreased maximally at the pandemic start (week 12) by 22.5 % (2019: 3.8 %, 2020: 3.0 %, percentage point change [95 % CI] = -0.86[-1.19, -0.05]) but was similar to 2019 utilization by mid-April 2020 (week 16). Telemedicine accounted for 50.1 % of AUD visits by early July 2020 (week 27). Individual therapy returned to 2019 levels within 1 week (i.e., week 13) whereas group therapy did not consistently do so until mid-August 2020 (week 31). Further, individual therapy exceeded 2019 levels by as much as 50 % starting mid-October 2020. The study found no substantial differences in visits by patient demographic or clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with known AUD, initial outpatient care disruptions were relatively brief. However, substantial shifts occurred in care delivery-an embrace of telemedicine but also more pronounced, longer disruptions in group therapy vs. individual and an increase in individual therapy use. Further research needs to help us understand the implications of these findings for clinical outcomes.

Receipt of Out-of-State Telemedicine Visits Among Medicare Beneficiaries During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, states implemented temporary changes allowing physicians without a license in their state to provide care to their residents. There is an ongoing debate at both the federal and state levels on whether to change licensure rules permanently to facilitate out-of-state telemedicine use. Objective: To describe out-of-state telemedicine use during the pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of telemedicine visits included all patients with traditional Medicare from January through June 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Telemedicine visits from January through June 2021 where the patient's home address and the physician's practice address were in different states. Results: In describing which patients and specialties were using out-of-state telemedicine, we focused on the period between January to June 2021. We chose this period because it was after the turmoil of the early pandemic, when vaccines became widely available and the health care system had stabilized, but before many of the temporary licensing regulations began to lapse by mid-2021. In the first half of 2021, there were 8 392 092 patients with a telemedicine visit and, of these, 422 547 (5.0%) had 1 or more out-of-state telemedicine visits. Those who lived in a county close to a state border (within 15 miles) accounted for 57.2% of all out-of-state telemedicine visits. Among the out-of-state visits in this time period, 64.3% were with a primary care or mental health clinician. For 62.6% of all out-of-state visits, a prior in-person visit occurred between the same patient and clinician between March 2019 and the visit. The demographics and conditions treated were similar for within-state and out-of-state telemedicine visits, with several notable exceptions. Among those with a telemedicine visit, people in rural communities were more likely to receive out-of-state telemedicine care (33.8% vs 21.0%), and there was high of out-of-state telemedicine use for cancer care (9.8% of all telemedicine visits for cancer care). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that licensure restrictions of out-of-state telemedicine would have had the largest effect on patients who lived near a state border, those in rural locales, and those who received primary care or mental health treatment.

Association Between Patient Demographic Characteristics and Devices Used to Access Telehealth Visits in a US Primary Care Network

This cross-sectional study assesses the association between patient characteristics and use of different devices to access telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trends In Mental Health Care Delivery By Psychiatrists And Nurse Practitioners In Medicare, 2011-19.

The supply of psychiatrists in the United States is inadequate to address the unmet demand for mental health care. Psychiatric mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs) may fill the widening gap between supply of and demand for mental health specialists with prescribing privileges. Using Medicare claims for a 100 percent sample of fee-for-service beneficiaries (average age, sixty-one years) who had an office visit for either a psychiatrist or a PMHNP during the period 2011-19, we examined how the supply and use of psychiatrists and PMHNPs changed over time, and we compared their practice patterns. Psychiatrists and PMHNPs treated roughly comparable patient populations with similar services and prescriptions. From 2011 to 2019 the number of PMHNPs treating Medicare beneficiaries grew 162 percent, compared with a 6 percent relative decrease in the number of psychiatrists doing so. During the same period, total annual mental health office visits per 100 beneficiaries decreased 11.5 percent from 27.4 to 24.2, the net result of a 29.0 percent drop in psychiatrist visits being offset by a 111.3 percent increase in PMHNP visits. The proportion of all mental health prescriber visits provided by PMHNPs increased from 12.5 percent to 29.8 percent during 2011-19, exceeding 50 percent in rural, full-scope-of-practice regions. PMHNPs are a rapidly growing workforce that may be instrumental in improving mental health care access.

Rapid Growth Of Remote Patient Monitoring Is Driven By A Small Number Of Primary Care Providers.

Growing enthusiasm for remote patient monitoring has been motivated by the hope that it can improve care for patients with poorly controlled chronic illness. In a national commercially insured population in the US, we found that billing for remote patient monitoring increased more than fourfold during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most of this growth was driven by a small number of primary care providers. Among the patients of these providers with a high volume of remote patient monitoring, we did not observe substantial targeting of remote patient monitoring to people with greater disease burden or worse disease control. Further research is needed to identify which patients benefit from remote patient monitoring, to inform evidence-based use and coverage decisions. In the meantime, payers and policy makers should closely monitor remote patient monitoring use and spending.

Association Between Telemedicine Use in Nonmetropolitan Counties and Quality of Care Received by Medicare Beneficiaries With Serious Mental Illness.

Importance: Access to specialty mental health care remains challenging for people with serious mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Whether expansion of telemedicine is associated with improved access and quality of care for these patients is unclear. Objective: To assess whether greater telemedicine use in a nonmetropolitan county is associated with quality measures, including use of specialty mental health care and medication adherence. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, the variable uptake of telemental health visits was examined across a national sample of fee-for-service claims from Medicare beneficiaries in 2916 nonmetropolitan counties between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018. Beneficiaries with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders and/or bipolar I disorder during the study period were included. For each year of the study, each county was categorized based on per capita telemental health service use (none, low, moderate, and high). The association between telemental health service use in the county and quality measures was tested using a multivariate model controlling for both patient characteristics and county fixed effects. Analyses were conducted from January 1 to April 11, 2022. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine reimbursement was limited to nonmetropolitan beneficiaries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of a minimum of 2 specialty mental health service visits (telemedicine or in-person) in the year, number of months per year with medication, hospitalization rate, and outpatient follow-up visits after a mental health hospitalization in a year. Results: In 2018, there were 2916 counties with 118 170 patients (77 068 [65.2%] men; mean [SD] age, 58.3 [15.6] years) in the sample. The fraction of counties that had high telemental health service use increased from 2% in 2010 to 17% in 2018. In 2018 there were 1.08 telemental health service visits per patient in the high telemental health counties. Compared with no telemental health care in the county, patients in high-use counties were 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.81-1.60 percentage points) (8.0% relative increase) more likely to have a minimum number of specialty mental health service visits, 13.7 percentage points (95% CI, 5.1-22.3 percentage points) (6.5% relative increase) more likely to have outpatient follow-up within 7 days of a mental health hospitalization, and 0.47 percentage points (95% CI, 0.25-0.69 percentage points) (7.6% relative increase) more likely to be hospitalized in a year. Telemental health service use was not associated with changes in medication adherence. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that greater use of telemental health visits in a county was associated with modest increases in contact with outpatient specialty mental health care professionals and greater likelihood of follow-up after hospitalization. No substantive changes in medication adherence were noted and an increase in mental health hospitalizations occurred.

Trends in Outpatient Telemedicine Utilization Among Rural Medicare Beneficiaries, 2010 to 2019.

Importance: Little is known about how telemedicine use was evolving before the broad changes that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Understanding prepandemic patterns of telemedicine use can inform ongoing debates on the future of telemedicine policy. Objective: To describe trends in telemedicine utilization among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries before the COVID-19 pandemic and the specialties of clinicians providing telemedicine. Design Setting and Participants: This was a cross-sectional study and descriptive analysis of telemedicine utilization by 10.4 million fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries from 2010 to 2019. Data analysis was performed from June 6, 2019, to July 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of telemedicine utilization, characteristics of beneficiaries who received telemedicine in 2010 to 2019, and specialties of clinicians delivering telemedicine. Results: Of 10.4 million rural Medicare beneficiaries, telemedicine was used by 91 483 individuals (age ≥65 years, 47 135 [51.5%]; women, 51 476 [56.3%]; and White, 76 467 [83.6%] individuals) in 2019. In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine visits grew by 23.1% annually. A total of 0.9% of all fee-for-service rural beneficiaries had a telemedicine visit in 2019 compared with 0.2% in 2010. In 2019, there were 257 979 telemedicine visits or 34.8 visits per 1000 rural beneficiaries and most (75.9%) of these visits were for mental health conditions. Patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia (3.0% of rural beneficiaries) received 40% of all telemedicine visits in 2019. Some traditionally disadvantaged and underserved groups comprised a larger share of telemedicine users than nonusers in 2019, such as those dually insured with Medicaid (56.9% of users vs 18.6% of nonusers; adjusted odd ratio, 3.83; 95% CI, 3.77-3.89). In 2010 to 2019, telemedicine for mental health conditions shifted away from psychiatrists (71.2% to 35.8% of all telemedicine visits) to nonphysician clinicians, eg, nurse practitioners, psychologists, and social workers (21.4% to 57.2%). There was wide variation in telemedicine utilization in 2019 across counties: median (IQR), 16.0 (2.5-51.4) telemedicine users per 1000 beneficiaries). In 891 counties (29% of all US counties), at least 10% of beneficiaries with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia used a telemedicine service in 2019. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of telemedicine utilization before the COVID-19 pandemic, there was sustained growth in telemedicine visits among rural beneficiaries covered by the Medicare program, especially care delivered by nurse practitioners and other nonphysician clinicians. The prepandemic model of telemedicine provided in local health care settings may be a viable modality to maintain in rural communities.

Legislation Increased Medicare Telestroke Billing, But Underbilling And Erroneous Billing Remain Common.

In the Furthering Access to Stroke Telemedicine (FAST) Act, passed as part of a budget omnibus in 2018, Congress permanently expanded Medicare payment for telemedicine consultations for acute stroke ("telestroke") from delivery only in rural areas to delivery in both urban and rural areas, effective January 1, 2019. Using a controlled time-series analysis, we found that one year after FAST Act implementation, billing for Medicare telestroke increased substantially in emergency departments at both directly affected urban hospitals and indirectly affected rural hospitals. However, at that time only a minority of hospitals with known telestroke capacity had ever billed Medicare for that service, and there was substantial billing inconsistent with Medicare requirements. As Congress considers options for Medicare telemedicine payment after the COVID-19 pandemic, our findings, which are consistent with confusion among providers regarding telemedicine billing requirements, suggest that simplified payment rules would help ensure that expanded reimbursement achieves its intended impact.