Overview
Title
To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to prohibit increased payments under a group health plan or group health insurance coverage for telehealth services furnished by a provider located at a facility.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 9457 is a plan to make sure that video doctor visits, called telehealth, don't cost more just because the doctor is at a special place called a facility. It also wants to study how often people use these video visits and how they pay for them.
Summary AI
H.R. 9457, known as the “Transparent Telehealth Bills Act of 2024,” seeks to change the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. This bill aims to prohibit increased payments for telehealth services when these services are provided by a healthcare provider located at a facility. The idea is to ensure that the cost of telehealth services is not higher just because the provider is at a specific location, aligning payments with the amount that would apply if the provider were not at such a facility. Additionally, it mandates a report to Congress on the use of telehealth services by group health plans, with insights into trends, access, and reimbursement practices.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, entitled the "Transparent Telehealth Bills Act of 2024," aims to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Specifically, it seeks to prohibit group health plans and group health insurance coverage from making higher payments for telehealth services when these services are furnished by healthcare providers located at a facility. Instead, it mandates that payments for such telehealth services not exceed what would be recognized if the healthcare provider were not at a facility. Additionally, it tasks the Comptroller General with reporting back to Congress, within 18 months after the bill's enactment, about various trends related to telehealth usage, access, and payment dynamics under group health plans.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues arise from this bill. One major concern is the ambiguous term "facility," which could lead to confusion over which settings are included under this definition. Such ambiguity might result in inconsistent implementation across different healthcare settings. Additionally, the restriction on increased payments for telehealth services provided at facilities may inadvertently discourage these services due to potentially insufficient reimbursement, particularly affecting rural or underserved areas. The absence of a clear definition for "facility fee" further complicates potential billing practices, potentially leading to disputes over what charges are permissible. The bill also does not account for the financial impacts of limiting payments, possibly discouraging providers at facilities from offering telehealth services due to the inability to cover costs.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill could affect the accessibility of telehealth services. By limiting payments for facility-based telehealth services, patients, especially those in rural or underserved communities, might encounter fewer available services if providers choose not to absorb the financial shortfall. This could reduce the convenience and efficiency that telehealth is known for, leading patients to seek in-person consultations, which could be logistically challenging and more time-consuming.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Healthcare providers located at facilities may experience negative financial impacts. Without commensurate payments to cover their operational costs for offering telehealth services, these providers might reconsider or reduce their telehealth offerings. Conversely, remote providers not associated with a facility could experience a competitive advantage, potentially gaining more patients due to these restrictions. This dynamic could impact service quality and market competition within the healthcare domain.
On the other hand, insurance companies might find the legislation beneficial due to the potential limitation on costs associated with telehealth service payments. However, this financial advantage for payers might be at the expense of limiting service availability, which could have broader implications for patient care.
Overall, this bill presents a complex interplay between cost-control measures and access to healthcare services, raising concerns that its implementation might inadvertently limit the reach and utility of telehealth in certain areas. These potential effects underscore the importance of clear and precise legislative language, as well as consideration of diverse impacts on all healthcare stakeholders.
Issues
The prohibition on increased payments for telehealth services furnished by providers located at a facility (Section 2, SEC. 726) may discourage the provision of telehealth services at such facilities due to financial constraints. This could limit access to telehealth services, particularly in rural or underserved areas.
The term 'facility' in Sections 2 and SEC. 726 is ambiguous, potentially leading to confusion over its scope and application. Clear definitions are necessary to ensure consistent implementation across different health care settings.
The bill may create a financial disincentive for health care providers at facilities to offer telehealth services, as they may not be able to cover their operational costs due to the limitations on payment (Section 2, SEC. 726).
The absence of a clear definition for 'facility fee' (Section 2, SEC. 726) could lead to significant billing ambiguities and disputes regarding what constitutes permissible charges associated with telehealth services.
The restriction on payment differences between facility-based and remote providers could favor remote providers (Section 2, SEC. 726), potentially impacting service quality and competition in the healthcare market.
The bill sets an effective date of 2026 without providing interim guidance for providers or health plans to transition to the new requirements (Section 2), leading to potential compliance and continuity issues.
The complexity of calculating 'the total amount recognized' for payments (Section 2) could result in an administrative burden and confusion for health care providers and insurers.
The bill does not address the potential technological investments needed at facilities to support telehealth services (Section 2, SEC. 726), which could impede the readiness and capacity of such facilities to implement telehealth effectively.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this Act gives it the official short title, "Transparent Telehealth Bills Act of 2024."
2. Prohibiting increased payments under a group health plan or group health insurance coverage for telehealth services furnished by a provider located at a facility Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section prohibits group health plans or health insurance from paying more for telehealth services provided by healthcare providers located at facilities than they would if the provider was located elsewhere. It requires the Comptroller General to report to Congress on telehealth usage, access, and related costs, with specific focus on various trends and statistics, by 18 months after the bill is enacted, and it becomes effective for plan years starting on or after January 1, 2026.
726. Prohibition on increased payments for telehealth services furnished by a provider located at a facility Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, the bill prohibits health plans from paying more for telehealth services provided by health care providers at a facility compared to those provided outside a facility. It also clarifies that "telehealth service" refers to any service given remotely via telecommunications.