Program is open to providers that exclusively offer telehealth services, and those providers that offer the telehealth services to other hospitals
In another sign that telehealth is now an established presence in the healthcare marketplace, The Joint Commission recently implemented a new Telehealth Accreditation Program. The initiative, which took effect on July 1, 2024, aims to provide “updated, streamlined standards” enabling “safe, high-quality” delivery of telehealth services to patients, according to a press release. The organization announced the program in April.
Dark Daily has regularly commented on the importance for clinical laboratories to recognize this trend and add the necessary services to meet the expectations and needs of telehealth/virtual doctor visits where the physician orders medical laboratory tests for the patient.
“The use of telehealth in the United States increased 154% during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and stabilized at levels 38 times higher than levels in 2019,” said Joint Commission President and CEO Jonathan B. Perlin, MD, PhD, in the press release.
“As telehealth continues to evolve, it was imperative to create a new accreditation program to provide a framework to support the integrity of patient safety regardless of the care setting,” he added.
The accrediting organization is reacting to market demand. Patient and doctor acceptance of virtual doctor visits and telehealth consults is now an established fact.
[PHOTO OF PERLIN HERE]
“Our new Telehealth Accreditation Program helps organizations standardize care and reduce risk so that all patients, including those obtaining services remotely, receive the safest, highest-quality care with outcomes consistent with traditional settings,” said Jonathan B. Perlin, MD, PhD (above), President/CEO, The Joint Commission, in a press release. Clinical laboratory accreditation nationwide is also handled by the not-for-profit organization. (Photo copyright: International Hospital Federation.)
Eligibility
The Joint Commission describes itself as “the nation’s oldest and largest standards-setting and accrediting body in healthcare.” The not-for-profit organization certifies more than 22,000 healthcare providers in the US, according to its website, including hospitals and medical laboratories. Its evaluations are based on surveys in which qualified experts conduct inspections of the facilities to ensure compliance with patient safety and quality standards.
Accreditation is not mandatory, however many states have licensing, certification, or contracting requirements that mandate accreditation by The Joint Commission or other accrediting bodies.
The program is open to providers that exclusively offer healthcare services “via telehealth or remote patient monitoring, with no in-person visits or encounters,” according to The Joint Commission website. This can include organizations that provide:
Primary care, specialty care, or urgent care,
Medical or behavioral consultation,
Remote patient monitoring, and
TeleICU, telestroke, telepsychiatry, or teleimaging services to hospitals.
Hospitals or other healthcare providers can also apply if they have contracts to offer “care, treatment, and services via telehealth to another organization’s patients,” The Joint Commission states. Examples include acute care or psychiatric hospitals that provide telehealth services to other facilities. In this case, the hospitals can obtain telehealth accreditation for the contracted services while maintaining their current accreditation for services provided onsite.
Requirements for Certification
The requirements for accreditation are similar to those in other Joint Commission programs, the organization says. This includes “requirements for information management, leadership, medication management, patient identification, documentation, and credentialing and privileging.”
In addition, it includes requirements specific to telehealth. For example, emergency management requirements have been streamlined to account for services provided remotely. It also contains standards related to telehealth equipment as well as provider and patient education about use of the technology.
“Additionally, the program’s standards may be filtered based on the telehealth modality or service provided,” the organization’s website notes.
Other Accrediting Organizations
The Joint Commission is not the only organization that offers telehealth accreditation or certification. The Utilization Review Accreditation Commission (URAC) provides accreditation programs for telehealth and remote patient monitoring, as well as a certification program for telehealth support services.
The telehealth accreditation program consists of three modules accounting for different forms of delivery:
Provider-to-provider (one provider offers services such as consultation to another provider).
The accreditation process takes up to four months, URAC says.
The Accreditation Commission for Health Care (ACHC) offers what it describes as a telehealth “Distinction” for certain kinds of healthcare providers that it has accredited, including:
Additionally, in April 2022, ACHC announced a telehealth certification program open to “any healthcare provider or organization that delivers health-related services via electronic information and telecommunication technologies,” regardless of whether they are accredited, according to a press release.
“The pandemic really pushed healthcare providers to adopt and grow telehealth services to maintain access for patients and, as a result, many of our clients were seeking ways to optimize this offering in the context of providing quality services,” said program director Teresa Hoosier, RN, in the press release. “ACHC Telehealth Certification establishes national standards. It promotes best practices for digital healthcare services. Certification confirms quality, safety, and consistency—strengthening trust in an organization and assuring patients that they are receiving the best care possible.”
This development is a reminder that clinical laboratory managers need a consumer/patient focused strategy and operational capability to collect specimens and provide medical laboratory tests for telehealth visits when the doctors order tests. It confirms that the trend of consumers/patients using remote healthcare is real, robust, and has legs.
Following the loss of its histology accreditation, pressure on APS laboratory continues to mount
Government-run healthcare systems around the world often under-invest as demand grows and new healthcare technologies enter clinical practice. One such example is taking place in New Zealand, where public pathology and medical laboratory services are under extreme stress as physician test orders exceed the ability of the island nation’s clinical laboratories to keep up.
“The escalating pressure is complicating what was already a very difficult rescue job at one of the country’s busiest labs—Community Anatomic Pathology Services (APS),” RNZ reported. In 2023, APS lost its histology accreditation after it came to light that lab workers were not only exposed to toxic chemical levels at the facility, but that patients were waiting weeks for test results to return from the lab.
“The service is in crisis mode and, without urgent investment … there is a real risk that it will fail. The changes required are of such urgency that it is recommended that they be placed at the top of the agenda,” the report reads, RNZ reported.
“The size of New Zealand’s economy is restricting what our country spends on health. Health is already the second highest demand on the New Zealand tax dollar,” wrote Andrew Blair, CMInstD (above), then General Manager of Royston Hospital, Hastings, New Zealand, in an article he penned for Jpn Hosp, the journal of the Japan Hospital Association. “The tolerance of New Zealanders would be challenged if a government attempted to increase taxes further to meet the growing demands for expenditure on health, but at the same time the population’s expectations are increasing. This is the challenging situation we face today.” For New Zealand’s clinical laboratories, the demand for testing is increasing annually as the country’s population grows. (Photo copyright: Blair Consulting.)
Increased Demand on APS Leads to Problems
Established in 2015, APS tests thousands of anatomic and tissue samples yearly and is utilized by approximately a third of NZ’s population, according to RNZ.
The big story, however, is that from 2022 to 2023 utilization increased by a third. “The overall increasing demand is greater than the capacity of the service,” Te Whatu Ora (Health New Zealand), the country’s publicly-funded healthcare system, told RNZ.
As planned care increased, public hospitals started outsourcing operations to private surgical centers. A domino effect ensued when all of those samples then made their way to APS. There was an “increased volume of private surgery being carried out by 600 specialists in the region and 2,000 general practitioners, with up to 450 histology cases a day,” RNZ noted, adding, “The backlog has hit turnaround times for processing samples, which had been deteriorating.”
To make matters even more dire, working conditions at the country’s clinical labs is unfavorable and deteriorating, with short staffing, outdated workspaces and equipment, and exposure to dangerous chemicals.
“Conditions got so bad from 2019-2021 that workers were exposed to cancer-causing formaldehyde in cramped workspaces, and flammable chemicals were stored unsafely,” RNZ reported.
While pay increases and safety improvements have provided some relief, the memory of past incidences coupled with increasing delays continue to undermine confidence in New Zealand’s laboratory industry.
Patients Also at Risk Due to Long Delays in Test Results
“We recognize the concern and impact any delayed results can cause referrers and their patients,” Health New Zealand said in a statement, RNZ reported.
Nevertheless, a 2023 article in The Conversation noted that, “38,000 New Zealanders had been waiting longer than the four-month target for being seen by a specialist for an initial assessment.”
However, according to plastic surgeon and Melanoma Network of New Zealand (MelNet) Chair Gary Duncan, MBChB, FRACS, when patients return to their doctors for test results, those results often have not come back from the medical laboratory. Therefore, the physician cannot discuss any issues, which causes the patient to have to make another appointment or receive a melanoma diagnosis over the telephone, RNZ reported.
“Slow pathology services are unfair to patients. Such delays could result in the spreading of the melanoma to other parts of the body and require major surgery under anesthetic,” dermatologist Louise Reiche, MBChB, FRACS, told RNZ. “Not only will they suffer an extensive surgical procedure, but it could also shorten their life.”
Improvements at APS Underway
Changes are currently underway that may decrease the long delays in test results at New Zealand’s labs. “A business case was being done to set up an electronic ordering system to cut down on manual processing errors,” RNZ reported.
Additionally, “the situation is much improved due to dispersal of work around [the] city and country for now. The teamwork around the region has been a veritable lifesaver,” a source familiar with the work told RNZ.
Construction of a new lab for APS is also allegedly in the works. However, to date no announcement has been made, according to RNZ.
Time will tell if New Zealand’s government can repair its pathology system. News stories showcasing damage caused by lengthy delays in clinical laboratory test results—and the ensuing patient harm due to rationed care in general—continue to reveal the weakness in government-run healthcare systems.
Nation’s healthcare system is in the midst of major clinical, organizational, and financial reforms—many of which require immediate responses by pathology laboratories
One challenge is how to improve the quality of lab testing services and demonstrate value to payers. The other challenge is how medical laboratories in the UK can cope with shrinking budgets for medical laboratories. (more…)
Clinical laboratory organizations that seek to set themselves “apart from the herd” are seeking internally recognized quality accreditation, such as ISO 15189
Even as only a small number of clinical laboratories, in the United States have taken the steps to earn accreditation to ISO 15189 Medical Laboratories, it is a different story in other nations, particularly where no statutory requirement for medical laboratory licensure or accreditation exists.
North of the border, the Canadian Province of Ontario has based medical laboratory accreditation on ISO 15189. Over the past decade, more than 130 laboratory organizations in the province have earned accreditation to ISO 15189. Other provinces in Canada have taken steps to develop their own ISO 15189 accreditation programs. (more…)
The Increase in Certifications is the Result of New Reimbursement Models for Patient-Centered Medical Homes by Third-Party Payers
There is much activity in the patient-centered medical homes (PCMH) sector of the U.S. healthcare system. A host of certification and accreditation bodies have set up shop and they report a rapid increase in the number of organizations they are recognizing as medical homes.
That fact alone is significant news. It is evidence that physicians are spending substantial time and money to convert their medical practices into medical homes. In turn, this trend represents an opportunity for clinical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups, since medical homes need to order clinical laboratory tests on behalf of their patients. (more…)
