Providers and patients indicate that telehealth and substance use disorder treatment are priority issues.
With Election Day now behind us and Congress returning, the switch to the new legislative season, both federal and state, has begun. Looking ahead, we expect to see continued discussions surrounding both telehealth and substance use disorder treatment – and recent reports indicate that the two might work together better than one might expect!
A new study released by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) determined that virtual care during the pandemic both reduced individuals’ risk of overdose, as well as increased the use of medication-assisted treatment.
The biggest way that telehealth can impact substance use disorder treatment is honestly simple: by expanding access. Individuals are often unwilling or unable to seek substance use disorder treatment for the same reasons any individual can find it difficult to access healthcare: transportation issues, travel time to an office, lack of paid time off, or physical health constraints.
What is different about substance use disorders, however, is that telehealth also helps mitigate the stigma and shame surrounding the issue – many patients may find that a telehealth appointment is much more comfortable than being seen in an office. There has also historically been a shortage of providers offering necessary treatment, and telehealth has offered an extended reach for the providers that do.
But doctors and advocates alike note that there can also be unique challenges to providing substance use disorder treatment via telehealth, and that there may be a different model lawmakers should consider.
While treating substance use disorders virtually comes with the typical worries about providers missing body-language and nonverbal cues, as well as decreasing patient accountability, one of the specific risks of using telehealth to treat these disorders is the isolation it may bring.
Whether particularly enjoyable for the patient or not, there is a social aspect of coming into a doctor’s office or attending an in-person treatment group or group therapy. Additionally, the same stigma and shame that might make a patient more comfortable with virtual treatment can at the same time be a risk factor for patients not able to speak candidly if someone else is in the home with them during the appointment.
Many acknowledge that telehealth certainly has its time and place; when the results of the JAMA study came out, the American Telemedicine Association noted that this was “a strong signal to policymakers that telehealth can and should be a permanent part of healthcare delivery.” And indeed, a recent nationwide physician survey found that 85 percent of respondents were in favor of making telehealth permanent for the treatment of opioid use disorder, with 68 percent strongly in favor.
But it might be better to look at both telehealth and in-office visits as tools in the provider’s belt, rather than an all-encompassing solution, especially for issues as complex as substance use disorder. Providers can pick and choose which tool (or combination of tools) works best for each patient’s situation. Taking this idea, lawmakers are being encouraged to consider a hybrid model of treatment going forward.
As legislators gear up for busy terms in the coming months, they will need to consider how best to support healthcare for this vulnerable population – and remember that as a Board member of the American Telehealth Association stated recently when speaking on the subject, “laws often constitute a bridge from where our society is, to where we want it to go.”
Many providers and patients alike have indicated that telehealth and substance use disorder treatment are priority issues for them – so now it’s up to legislators to craft the bridge to that reality.
For decades, clinical documentation integrity (CDI) programs have been synonymous with inpatient care. They evolved from early efforts to improve Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) accuracy into
Here’s the uncomfortable truth: many hospitals and state Medicaid plans, under pressure from HR1 data analysis needs, are paying eye-watering markups to for-profit CPA and
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
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.
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.
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.
Only ICD10monitor delivers what you need: updates on must-know changes associated with the FY26 IPPS, including new ICD-10-CM/PCS codes, CCs/MCCs, and MS-DRGs, plus insights, analysis and answers to your questions from two of the country’s most respected subject matter experts.
Get clear, practical answers to Medicare’s most confusing regulations. Join Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he breaks down real-world compliance challenges and shares guidance your team can apply right away.
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.
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.
Learn how to navigate the proposed elimination of the Inpatient-Only list. Gain strategies to assess admission status, avoid denials, protect compliance, and address impacts across Medicare and non-Medicare payors. Essential insights for hospitals.
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
