Court case examines telemedicine safety regulations

A case before a United States Court of Appeals could restrict a state medical board from protecting patient safety through the regulation of telemedicine in that state. At stake in Teladoc, Inc. v. Texas Medical Board is whether the Texas Medical Board has demonstrated immunity from federal antitrust laws.  The Court of Appeals is being asked to determine whether the Board may be held liable under the antitrust laws for its rule requiring a “defined physician-patient relationship to exist before a physician may prescribe dangerous or addictive medications. The necessary relationship is defined as established through either an in-person examination or an examination by electronic means with a health care professional present with the patient. Teladoc, which uses telecommunications to connect patients and physicians, provides services in a way that would allow physicians to prescribe medications without the establishment of the required patient-physician relationship. Teladoc alleges that if the Board’s rule is valid, Teladoc would be limited in the way it could carry on business in Texas. It contends that this rule is anticompetitive and seeks to hold the Board liable under federal antitrust laws. Telemedicine is advancing rapidly as a tool to improve access to care and reduce the growth in health care spending. Last month the AMA House of Delegates adopted new ethical ground rules for telemedicine. But the telemedicine standards of care and practice guidelines ar...
Source: AMA Wire - Category: Journals (General) Authors: Source Type: news