Subramanian, Sanjay

Objectives: Expanded coverage for telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed providers to bill for telemedicine services that were previously not reimbursable, including telemedicine critical care (TCC) services for critically ill patients. We aimed to characterize TCC billing practices among Medicare beneficiaries before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Patients: This was a serial cross-sectional study of adult Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries with at least one bill for critical care at acute care hospitals from January 2018 to September 2024. TCC billing was identified using provider billing codes; multivariate regression models were used to determine characteristics associated with receipt of TCC. Key outcomes were patient-, provider-, and hospital-level characteristics associated with TCC billing. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Billing for TCC increased from 0.002% of critical care bills pre-pandemic to 0.01% of critical care bills during and after the pandemic. Patients billed for TCC were disproportionately likely to have COVID-19 but were otherwise relatively similar to critically ill patients not billed for TCC. Internal medicine/critical care providers accounted for the highest proportion of pandemic TCC bills (46.0%). TCC billing occurred more often at minor teaching hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03–1.43) and at safety-net hospitals (aOR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04–1.70). TCC billing was less likely at small-sized hospitals (aOR, 0.39; 95% CI 0.26–0.58) and medium-sized hospitals (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47–0.95), government-owned hospitals (aOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57–0.86), for-profit hospitals (aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48–0.71), rural hospitals (aOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55–0.89), and critical access hospitals (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47–0.73). Conclusions: Billing for TCC among hospitalized critically ill Medicare beneficiaries increased during the pandemic but remained low as a proportion of all critical care bills. There was variability in utilization across subspecialties and lesser utilization at rural and critical access hospitals. Further studies are needed to characterize the clinical and economic consequences of this shift.

OBJECTIVES: Telecritical care (TCC) refers to the delivery of critical care using telehealth technologies. Despite increasing utilization, significant practice variation exists and literature regarding efficacy remains sparse. The Telecritical Care Collaborative Network sought to provide expert, consensus-based best practice recommendations for the design and delivery of TCC. DESIGN: We used a modified Delphi methodology. Following literature review, an oversight panel identified core domains and developed declarative statements for review by an expert voting panel. During three voting rounds, voters agreed or disagreed with statements and provided open-ended feedback, which the oversight panel used to revise statements. Statements met criteria for consensus when accepted by greater than or equal to 85% of voters. SETTING/SUBJECTS: The oversight panel included 18 multidisciplinary members of the TCC Collaborative Network, and the voting panel included 32 invited experts in TCC, emphasizing diversity of discipline, care delivery models, and geography. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified ten core domains: definitions/terminology; care delivery models; staffing and coverage models; technological considerations; ergonomics and workplace safety; licensing, credentialing, and certification; trust and relationship building; quality, safety, and efficiency, research agenda; and advocacy, leading to 79 practice statements. Of 79 original statements, 67 were accepted in round 1. After revision, nine were accepted in round 2 and two in round 3 (two statements were merged). In total, 78 practice statements achieved expert consensus. CONCLUSIONS: These expert consensus recommendations cover a broad range of topics relevant to delivery of TCC. Experts agreed that TCC is most effective when delivered by care teams with specific expertise and by programs with explicit protocols focusing on effective communication, technical reliability, and real-time availability. Interventions should be tailored to local conditions. Although further research is needed to guide future best practice statements, these results provide valuable and actionable recommendations for the delivery of high-quality TCC.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused tremendous disruption to the U.S. healthcare system and nearly crippled some hospitals during large patient surges. Limited ICU beds across the country further exacerbated these challenges. Telemedicine, specifically tele-critical care (TCC), can expand a hospital’s clinical capabilities through remote expertise and increase capacity by offloading some monitoring to remote teams. Unfortunately, the rapid deployment of telemedicine, especially TCC, is constrained by multiple barriers. In the summer of 2020, to support the National Emergency Tele-Critical Care Network (NETCCN) deployment, more than 50 national leaders in applying telemedicine technologies to critical care assembled to provide their opinions about barriers to NETCCN implementation and strategies to overcome them. Through consensus, these experts developed white papers that formed the basis of this article. Herein, the authors share their experience and propose multiple solutions to barriers presented by laws, local policies and cultures, and individual perspectives according to a minimum, better, best paradigm for TCC delivery in the setting of a national disaster. Cross-state licensure and local privileging of virtual experts were identified as the most significant barriers to rapid deployment of services, whereas refining the model of TCC to achieve the best outcomes and defining the best financial model is the most significant for long-term success. Ultimately, we conclude that a rapidly deployable national telemedicine response system is achievable.

Objectives: In 2014, the Tele-ICU Committee of the Society of Critical Care Medicine published an article regarding the state of ICU telemedicine, one better defined today as tele-critical care. Given the rapid evolution in the field, the authors now provide an updated review. Data Sources and Study Selection: We searched PubMed and OVID for peer-reviewed literature published between 2010 and 2018 related to significant developments in tele-critical care, including its prevalence, function, activity, and technologies. Search terms included electronic ICU, tele-ICU, critical care telemedicine, and ICU telemedicine with appropriate descriptors relevant to each sub-section. Additionally, information from surveys done by the Society of Critical Care Medicine was included given the relevance to the discussion and was referenced accordingly. Data Extraction and Data Synthesis: Tele-critical care continues to evolve in multiple domains, including organizational structure, technologies, expanded-use case scenarios, and novel applications. Insights have been gained in economic impact and human and organizational factors affecting tele-critical care delivery. Legislation and credentialing continue to significantly influence the pace of tele-critical care growth and adoption. Conclusions: Tele-critical care is an established mechanism to leverage critical care expertise to ICUs and beyond, but systematic research comparing different models, approaches, and technologies is still needed.