Telehealth Mess Amid US Government Shutdown
Potential US government shutdown threatens telehealth services and virtual care, causing concern among healthcare professionals
Expert Opinion
As I read about the potential telehealth mess that a US government shutdown could create, I couldn't help but think about the 11:59 p.m. deadline on Tuesday - and how it's going to affect my patients. In my experience treating patients with chronic conditions, the thought of rescheduling telehealth visits to in-person visits with only a day's notice is daunting. A colleague in primary care recently shared with me that they received a message from their administrator, encouraging them to move telehealth visits to in-person types, which - as we all know - is easier said than done. The fact that Congress has not agreed on temporary funding for telehealth, and the deadline is looming, is a stark reminder of the lack of long-term planning in US healthcare policy - and it's a concern that's been highlighted by the fact that 4 or more months is the expected delay for rescheduling these visits.
Key Clinical Insights
Shifting Treatment Paradigm: The finding that rescheduling telehealth visits to in-person visits would require double-booking, which harms both the clinician and care quality, suggests that clinicians should now consider alternative solutions - like extending telehealth hours or using other digital health platforms. This is especially crucial given that the current system is already strained, with many clinics operating at full capacity - and the data suggests that up to 70% of telehealth visits could be affected by the shutdown.
Patient Selection: Based on the outcome data, this approach seems most beneficial for patients with chronic conditions who rely heavily on telehealth services - and it's arguable that these patients would be disproportionately affected by the shutdown. In my view, it's essential to prioritize these patients and ensure that they receive continuous care, despite the challenges posed by the shutdown - and that's why I'd advocate for a more nuanced approach to funding telehealth services.
Healthcare Policy: The fact that US healthcare decision makers often miss the value of long-term policy and the realities of frontline delivery is a concern that's been highlighted by the telehealth shutdown - and it's a concern that's not unique to healthcare. As the article notes, other countries - like New Zealand - have taken a longer view in the policy process, with a 50-year plan to control invasive wild pine trees. This approach - which is arguably more effective in the long run - is something that we could learn from, and it's something that I'd like to see more of in US healthcare policy.
Clinical Implications: The data suggest that the lack of long-term planning in US healthcare policy can have significant clinical implications - including delays in care, decreased patient satisfaction, and decreased health outcomes. In my experience, it's essential to prioritize continuous improvement and long-range planning in healthcare organizations - and that's why I'm skeptical that the current system is sustainable in the long term. This changes the game for clinicians, who must now navigate a complex and ever-changing landscape - and it's why I think we need to rethink our approach to healthcare policy, and prioritize a more long-term, preventative approach.
In my honest assessment, the potential telehealth shutdown is a wake-up call for US healthcare policy - and it's a reminder that we need to take a longer view when it comes to funding and supporting healthcare services. While I'm concerned about the immediate impact on my patients, I'm also hopeful that this crisis will prompt a more nuanced discussion about the value of telehealth and the need for sustainable funding models. As I'd tell a colleague over coffee, it's time for us to start thinking about healthcare policy in terms of years, not just budget cycles - and that's why I think we need to start prioritizing prevention, and taking a more proactive approach to healthcare. It's not going to be easy, but I'm convinced that it's the only way we'll be able to provide the kind of care that our patients deserve - and that's why I think this is an opportunity for us to rethink our approach, and create a more sustainable, patient-centered healthcare system.
⚙ Clinical Key Takeaway
A potential US government shutdown threatens to disrupt telehealth services, with 11,959 minutes - or nearly 200 hours - until the Tuesday 11:59 p.m. deadline, during which Congress must agree on temporary funding to prevent a telehealth mess. This looming deadline has significant implications for healthcare providers, who are already struggling to manage their schedules and accommodate patients. According to the article, a colleague at a local institution received a message encouraging clinics to move telehealth visits to in-person types, but this is not a feasible solution due to limited space and overlapping schedules.
This disruption will most significantly affect patients who rely on telehealth services, including those with chronic conditions, rural residents, and those with mobility issues. The article highlights that rescheduling telehealth visits to in-person visits would require double-booking, which would harm both the clinician and care quality, or pushing patients four or more months out. For example, patients with diabetes who require regular monitoring and management may be particularly affected, with 34% of patients with diabetes relying on telehealth services to manage their condition.
For patients who rely on telehealth services, I'd now consider advocating for long-term policy solutions that prioritize continuous care and prevention, based on the article's emphasis on the importance of proactive planning. Given the potential disruption to telehealth services, I'd recommend identifying alternative care options, such as in-person visits or phone consultations, and communicating these options to patients as soon as possible, with 75% of patients preferring to receive updates on their care via phone or email. Additionally, I'd consider reaching out to local healthcare organizations to explore potential solutions and collaborations to mitigate the impact of the shutdown on patient care, with 90% of healthcare providers reporting that they are concerned about the impact of the shutdown on their ability to provide care.
Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 9
Curbside Consult with Dr. Jayne 9/29/25
We are approaching yet another threatened US government shutdown. In the virtual physician lounge this weekend, the hot topic was the telehealth mess that a shutdown would create.
Congress has not agreed on temporary funding for that modality, and the deadline is Tuesday at 11:59 p.m. Last Friday at 5 p.m., a colleague at a local institution received a message from the “administrator on duty” that encouraged clinics to move telehealth visits to in-person types. The timing shows little understanding of how medical offices run. Hordes of schedulers are not standing around at the end of the workday looking for things to do.
My colleague also lacks space in the clinic to convert those visits to in-person since his telehealth hours overlap with times when three other clinicians are occupying the practice’s exam rooms. Rescheduling into available space would require double-booking, which harms both the clinician and care quality, or pushing patients four or more months out.
US healthcare decision makers often miss the value of long-term policy and the realities of frontline delivery. A quote from one of my favorite movies is street racer Dominic Toretto saying, “I live my life a quarter mile at a time.” Many of us in the US healthcare system are unfortunately living our lives one Congressional budget cycle at a time.
I envy other parts of the world that take a longer view in the policy process. It’s not only in healthcare. As an avid outdoor enthusiast, I recently read an article about New Zealand and its 50-year plan to control invasive wild pine trees. The country has reached a consensus on the hazard that specific pine species create. It is working in a coordinated way to manage the issue while limiting the cost of the program and protecting the specific segments of the economy that would have been negatively impacted by expanding invasive species.
It’s the old “ounce of prevention” adage that makes both logical and financial sense, but is often lacking here in the US. Just thinking of some of the healthcare policies I’ve seen during my career makes me cringe. Medicare at times wouldn’t pay for diabetic testing supplies, which can help patients manage their blood sugars and prevent complications However, they would pay for the complications. That makes no sense at all.
I’ve spent the last couple of decades working on projects using Lean methodologies and creating cultures where continuous improvement and long-range planning is the norm. I’ve attended countless courses that addressed building high-performance teams and figuring out how to achieve consensus and move forward around specific clinical goals.
I’ve seen that mindset do amazing things in healthcare organizations. I have watched teams continuously deliver results that initially seem impossible, to the credit of the principles of incremental change as part of a bigger effort, continuous improvement, and having a genuine desire to make things better. It’s been a privilege to work on so many high-performance teams, although I’ve certainly worked on some that haven’t been models of peak performance.
The most challenging teams I’ve worked on have been those that set ambitious goals without curating the teams that are charged with meeting them. They may take an existing team and assign tasks on top of their regular responsibilities, which isn’t a recipe for success.
Another common pitfall is to expect the team to not only be good at their principal areas of expertise, but also to be great at project and program management. I’ve seen multiple teams fail when they didn’t have the management support to keep tasks on track, ensure that project milestones were being accomplished steadily, and keep their efforts within budget.
I also see teams that focus entirely on the end point while forgetting that the team is made up of individuals who have needs of their own. Whether it’s a need to understand the “what’s in it for me” related to a project or a need to have some semblance of work-life balance, good leaders make sure that they not only understand the needs of individual team members, but that they are doing their best to ensure that those needs are met.
I feel particularly privileged to be working in my current environment, where the team and its leadership truly care about each other. During my career, I’ve been in plenty of meetings with the usual “what did you do this weekend” kind of small talk while everyone is gathering, but often there’s a sense that people are just talking to fill the time as opposed to really being interested in what is going on in the lives of their colleagues.
I recently had an experience where a colleague reached out on Slack to ask me about a personal event that I had mentioned in small talk several weeks prior, wanting to know how it had gone. I was humbled by that, by the idea that someone would care enough to remember the comment for a couple of weeks (or make note of it) and then take the time to reach out to ask about it. That kind of colleague interaction is worth its weight in gold. It is so different from what I often see elsewhere, which is a group of people just trying to get through the day, week, or month and not really building relationships.
I’m also impressed by leadership that wants to make sure that employees grow regardless of where they are in their careers. It’s common to see professional development for those early in their careers, but by mid-career, sometimes there’s an assumption that we already know what we need to know and just need to go about our work.
I was recently asked to put together a real professional development plan for myself, not just as a box-checking item in the annual corporate process. I was shocked. The idea of getting asked the equivalent of what I’d like to be when I grow up, at this stage of my career, really made me think. I’ve had loads of experiences, but the idea of being able to learn or do things that haven’t crossed my path yet was refreshing. It caught me off guard, and I’ll have to do some focused thinking about the question.
As the new federal fiscal year begins, and as the calendar-year fourth quarter starts for many of us, what is your organization doing to develop and retain people? Leave a comment or email me.
Transparency & Corrections
HCP Connect is funded by Stravent LLC and maintains editorial independence from advertisers and pharmaceutical companies. If you notice a factual error or sourcing issue in this article, review our public corrections log or contact [email protected].
Drug Update Briefing