The Physical Therapy Licensure Compact introduced in 2014 has just met the requirements it needs to allow licensed PTs to provide care across these state boundaries.
These are the ten states currently in the compact:
– Oregon (The first state to join!)
– North Dakota
When this was first introduced, the Federation of State Boards of Physical Therapy (FSBPT) attributed state boundaries as well as differences in licensure and practice requirements as barriers to accessing healthcare. What PTLC does is open the doors between those state boundaries by removing those differences in requirements. As a result, qualified PTs and PTAs in the above states would gain “compact privileges” allowing them to practice in any or all of these participating compact states. All they have to do is manage the one license in their home state.
It’s important to note that patient safety and protection is still a main priority. Allowing providers to practice across state lines will not reduce the quality of care because the states signing the compact are working together and committing to the same set of standards for their PTs. The signing states should be aware of this and know that the compact agreements will supersede other conflicting statutes in the interest of patient protection.
The FSBPT also states that the potential positive impacts on public protection with increasing licensure portability include:
- Increased patient access to qualified providers
- Continuity of care for patients as they relocate or vacation
- Enhanced disciplinary data and improve notification
- Improved information sharing between jurisdictions
When more states sign the compact down the line, physical therapists in those locations could branch out their practice even more. Patients too would benefit because they’d have greater options in finding the best provider for them. With the practice of Telehealth growing, PTs can easily meet patients face-to-face with crystal clear quality, anywhere.
In the end, these ten states have made a huge breakthrough for physical therapy and it should be seen as a catalyst for other major areas of healthcare.…Read More
After a six-year conflict between the Texas Medical Board and Teladoc, Texas lawmakers just removed a state rule requiring providers to have a face-to-face consultation before providing telemedicine services. This changes the game for residents in who and how those patients access healthcare.
In 2011, the Texas Medical Board sent a letter to Teledoc stating that certain practices had violated the agency’s rules about establishing “a proper professional relationship with the patient” and threatened disciplinary action. Teledoc sued, arguing that the letter overstated existing rules.
As part of the actions against Teledoc, TMB had attempted to revoke the licenses of doctors working for the company and tried to bar them from providing services. A 2014 opinion from the Texas Court of Appeals however decided that TMB’s claim was invalid and ruled in favor of Teledoc.
Several years and lawsuits later, the Texas Senate has amended SB1107 to remove the requirement of face-to-face consultations if the provider has never seen the patient.
[ (5) require a face to face consultation between a patient and a physician providing a telemedicine medical service within a certain number of days following an initial telemedicine medical service only if the physician has never seen the patient].
This is a huge leap forward for Telemedicine in Texas as it enables providers in the state to use the technology more freely and closer to its potential by reaching more patients, especially in underserved areas. It’s important to note that while this piece of text is scrapped, it is on the condition that patients will continue to receive care that is on par with an in-person visit.…
The Affordable Care Act that brought health coverage to millions of uninsured Americans is now being threatened by the GOP’s plan to Repeal & Replace. Under this new plan, our current law requiring insurers to accept all applicants, (at the same rates regardless of pre-existing conditions) is in the talks of being rolled back while its replacement is being voted in; but that’s not all that’s being targeted.
Meet the AHCA (American Health Care Act) and some of its particularly notable sections.
(Sec. 101) Eliminates funding after FY2018 for the Prevention and Public Health Fund.
Among these prevention programs are Alzheimer’s, Diabetes, Heart Disease & Stroke and Immunizations. For the full list of programs, visit: https://www.hhs.gov/open/prevention/
(Sec. 103) Federal funds may be withheld from states for payments to family planning providers.
The one example given? Planned Parenthood. Funds should not be withheld from a state for supporting a non-profit that provides versatile care for women and men’s reproductive health.
(Sec. 112) Beginning 2020, the bill eliminates Medicaid services to adult enrollees made newly eligible for Medicaid by PPACA. It also eliminates the requirement to provide “essential health benefits”
(such as ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, laboratory services, preventative and wellness services, and pediatric services) These are services that should remain covered by Medicaid.
(Sec. 113) Eliminates Medicaid Disproportionate Share Hospital. (DSH hospitals received additional payment for treating low-income patients.)
This bill would eliminate the additional funding hospitals get for treating low income patients. Effectively incentivizing hospitals to ignore those who can’t pay.
(Sec. 114) Eliminates retroactive Medicaid coverage to applicants; state can also delay or deny coverage pending immigration status/verification of status – during which time they will not be covered.
If the verdict turned out that the applicant was eligible for Medicaid but required care while being verified, are they expected to hold off on receiving help until they’re officially and verifiably covered?
(Sec. 115) Gives additional federal funding to states that did not expand Medicaid coverage under the ACA. If said state later expands Medicaid under the ACA, they are ineligible for said funding.
Not only do hospitals not receive additional payment for serving those with low-income, the entire state will be ineligible for additional funding if the state expanded their Medicaid coverage. On top of this, why do states that didn’t expand their coverage receive even more money? Why are they getting paid for not helping their poorer residents get health insurance?
(Sec. 116) Medicaid eligibility subject to checks every 6 months, which requires additional funds. (“The bill temporarily increases by 5% the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage”).
Amidst all the cutbacks to preventative health, insurance coverage and hospital subsidies this bill proposes that we allocate funding towards repetitive checks to make sure citizens aren’t falsely eligible to be covered by Medicaid. The frequency of checks is mountainous.
(Sec. 133) Health insurers must increase premiums by 30% for one year for enrollees in the individual or small group market who had a break in coverage of more than 62 days in the previous year.
This sounds like penalizing one for not having health insurance; a familiar complaint, except now the application process is less forgiving (See Sec. 114).
(Sec. 205) Repeals the penalties for those not following the Individual Mandate of having minimum essential coverage (beginning after Dec 31, 2015).
They’ve removed the penalty on individuals for not having health insurance, but Sec. 133 shows that if they were uninsured for 62 days and then later want insurance, they’ll receive a year-long hike in premiums when they do eventually opt in.
(Sec. 206) Removes the Employer Mandate, effective after Dec 31, 2015).
By this section, large employers will not be required to offer minimum essential coverage to full-time employees and their dependents. (All the services listed in Sec. 112)
The takeaway is this, 217 Republican members of Congress decided that we can do without:
– Protection for those with pre-existing conditions.
– Medicaid program requirements to provide essential health services.
– Massive funds to preventative care.
– Health insurance for millions.…
This article covers number of updates that we released this past weekend.
Users can now set a payment requirement when scheduling a session, so that participants cannot enter the session without first making the payment.
To do so requires a little bit of setup:
- Connect a Stripe account.
- Set up an Account Service.
- Schedule a new session (and set payment requirement).
Session Usage Lookup
You are no longer required to be an Account Administrator to look up your own session usage on your account, though Account Administrators can continue to look up session usage for all users: How to look up Session Usage?
Change in Plan Types
SecureVideo now only offers two plan types: a free trial, or a fully-featured account which includes the ability to create multiple users. This allows us to provide more consistent features across our customers. Plans now only differ by pricing, or the use of add-ons such as Virtual Clinic or session recording.
New users are also billed for differently: billing for users will now use average monthly hours and be pro-rated accordingly. (e.g., if User A is added for the first two weeks and then deleted, and User B is added for the last two weeks of the month, this averages only to 1 additional user for that month.)
Additional API Functionality
We have added or enhanced existing API commands to allow users to:
- filter on account History by the User ID of the host, and/or email address of an attendee (see API – History)
- filter on an account’s active sessions by the User ID of the host, and/or email address of an attendee (see API – Sessions)
- retrieve information on recordings stored on the SecureVideo server (see API – Recordings)