Cason Jana, Brannon Janice A
Spalding University, Auerbach School of Occupational Therapy.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
Int J Telerehabil. 2011 Dec 20;3(2):15-8. doi: 10.5195/ijt.2011.6077. eCollection 2011 Fall.
As telehealth gains momentum as a service delivery model in the United States within the rehabilitation professions, regulatory and legal questions arise. This article examines the following questions: Is there a need to secure licenses in two states (i.e., where the practitioner resides, and where the client is located), before engaging in telehealth?Do state laws differ concerning if and how telehealth can occur?Do any states expressly disallow telehealth?Can services delivered through telehealth be billed the same way as services provided in-person?If practitioners fulfill the requirements to maintain licensure (e.g., continuing education obligations) in their state of residence, do they also need to fulfill the requirements to maintain licensure for the state in which the client resides?Will professional malpractice insurance cover services delivered through telehealth?Does a sole practitioner need to abide by HIPAA regulations?Responses to these questions are offered to raise awareness of the regulatory and legal implications associated with the use of a telehealth service delivery model within the professions of occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech-language pathology and audiology.
随着远程医疗作为一种服务提供模式在美国康复行业中蓬勃发展，监管和法律问题随之出现。本文探讨以下问题：在开展远程医疗之前，是否需要在两个州（即从业者所在州和客户所在州）都获得许可？各州法律在远程医疗能否开展以及如何开展方面是否存在差异？是否有州明确禁止远程医疗？通过远程医疗提供的服务能否与面对面提供的服务采用相同的计费方式？如果从业者满足其所在州维持执照的要求（例如继续教育义务），他们是否还需要满足客户所在州维持执照的要求？专业医疗事故保险是否涵盖通过远程医疗提供的服务？个体从业者是否需要遵守《健康保险流通与责任法案》（HIPAA）的规定？针对这些问题给出了答复，以提高人们对职业治疗、物理治疗、言语语言病理学和听力学等行业中使用远程医疗服务提供模式所涉及的监管和法律影响的认识。
