The Federal Government’s Complicated Relationship with Telehealth

The Federal Government’s Complicated Relationship with Telehealth

As part of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, or PHE, which officially ended earlier this month, the federal government gave healthcare providers considerable flexibility to continue practicing via telehealth by dropping restrictions on its use.  

Congress extended some of these flexibilities until Dec. 31, 2024, providing federal agencies of jurisdiction time to analyze the full impact of telehealth and Congress time to consider whether and how these waivers will be extended. Importantly, it was also done in part to add more evidence to the growing but inadequate pool of virtual care research. 

In addition, just last week, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released an official notification stating that with the end of the PHE, healthcare providers will have 90 days to transition back into compliance with the telehealth rules they operated under prior to the pandemic.

However, two days before the PHE expired, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) extended telehealth flexibilities that enable clinicians to virtually prescribe controlled medications to their patients for another six months. That was going to end with the PHE’s termination.

According to comments submitted to the DEA by the American Telemedicine Association, failure to extend these pandemic-era flexibilities, thereby once again requiring patients to be evaluated in-person by a doctor to receive prescriptions for certain controlled substances, would miss the point entirely of the gains made by telehealth during the pandemic – and reinstate barriers to care. 

This interplay of positions on the use of telehealth between Congress and multiple federal agencies demonstrates the complicated relationship the feds seem to have with the provision of telehealth services.

Now, let’s go back to that growing yet inadequate pool of virtual care research I mentioned earlier, and briefly investigate a couple of primary claims about expanded telehealth use and what the research shows.

Before the DEA extended its pandemic flexibilities, the agency had actually planned to do the exact opposite of what it wound up doing, and increase restrictions on virtual prescribing of controlled substances under the proposition that more safeguards were needed to prevent online over-prescribing of controlled medication.

However, according to a recent study conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, expanded use of telehealth services during the pandemic was shown to reduce the risk of opioid overdoses, while increasing opioid use disorder treatment, access, and adherence.

Policymakers also expressed worry that expanded telehealth during the pandemic was being utilized inappropriately, leading to an increase in emergency department usage. But once again, the research proved otherwise.

According to a study report released last month in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), researchers examined data from nearly 14,000 family physicians with about 13 million patients and found that patients of doctors who used virtual care for over 20 percent of their patient visits went to the ED less often than those whose doctors held fewer of their appointments virtually.

Accordingly, the researchers concluded that expanded telehealth access can actually outweigh face-to-face interaction when it comes to quality of care, wholly refuting the purported connection between expanded telehealth services and increased ED utilization.

It remains unclear how long temporary telehealth flexibilities will be extended, if or when the DEA will issue a final rule on virtual prescribing of controlled substances, and whether Congress will act to finalize the telehealth flexibilities it extended through the end of next year.

The one thing that does seem clear is that, in order to simplify the complex relationship our governing bodies have with telehealth, they need to spend more time diligently evaluating pertinent research findings and considering comments from patients and providers across the healthcare spectrum to draw appropriate, substantiated conclusions on the proper regulatory path forward.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Adam Brenman

Adam Brenman is a Sr. Gov’t Affairs Liaison at Zelis Healthcare. He previously served as Manager of Public Policy at WellCare Health Plans, where he led an analyst team in review, analysis, and development of advocacy materials related to state and federal legislation/regulatory guidance. He holds a master’s degree in Public Policy & Administration from Northwestern University and has also worked as a government affairs rep/lobbyist for a national healthcare provider association.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.

December 3, 2025

Proactive Denial Management: Data-Driven Strategies to Prevent Revenue Loss

Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.

November 19, 2025
Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.

September 24, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.

November 13, 2025
E/M Services Under Intensive Federal Scrutiny: Navigating Split/Shared, Incident-to & Critical Care Compliance in 2025-2026

E/M Services Under Intensive Federal Scrutiny: Navigating Split/Shared, Incident-to & Critical Care Compliance in 2025-2026

During this essential RACmonitor webcast Michael Calahan, PA, MBA Certified Compliance Officer, will clarify the rules, dispel common misconceptions, and equip you with practical strategies to code, document, and bill high-risk split/shared, incident-to & critical care E/M services with confidence. Don’t let audit risks or revenue losses catch your organization off guard — learn exactly what federal auditors are looking for and how to ensure your documentation and reporting stand up to scrutiny.

August 26, 2025

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24