Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, many mental health care services have been shifted from face-to-face to virtual interactions. Several health policy changes have influenced telehealth uptake during this time, including changes in technology, Internet connectivity, prescriptions, and reimbursement for services. These changes have been implemented for the duration of the pandemic, and it is unclear if all, some, or none of these new or amended policies will be retained after the pandemic has ended. Accordingly, in the wake of changing policies, mental health care providers will need to make decisions about the future of their telehealth programs. This article briefly reviews telehealth policy changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlights what providers should consider for future delivery and implementation of their telehealth programs.

Background Advances in diagnostics testing and treatment of genetic conditions have led to increased demand for genetic services in the United States. At the same time, there is a shortage of genetic services professionals. Thus, understanding the models of service delivery currently in use can help increase access and improve outcomes for individuals identified with genetic conditions. Objective This review aims to provide an overview of barriers and facilitators to genetic service delivery models to inform future service delivery. Methods We conducted a scoping literature review of the evidence to more fully understand barriers and facilitators around the provision of genetic services. Results There were a number of challenges identified, including the limited number of genetics specialists, wait time for appointments, delivery of services by nongenetics providers, reimbursement, and licensure. The ways to address these challenges include the use of health information technology such as telehealth, group genetic counseling, provider-to-provider education, partnership models, and training; expanding genetic provider types; and embedding genetic counselors in clinical settings. Conclusions The literature review highlighted the need to expand access to genetic services. Ways to expand services include telehealth, technical assistance, and changing staffing models. In addition, using technology to improve knowledge among related professionals can help expand access.

Electronic health record (EHR) use throughout the United States has advanced considerably, but functionality to support the optimal care of children has been slower to develop and deploy. A previous team of experts systematically identified gaps in EHR functionality during collaborative work from 2010 to 2013 that produced the Children's EHR Format (Format), funded under the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009, Public Law 111-3. After that, a team of practitioners, software developers, health policy leaders, and other stakeholders examined the Format's exhaustive list of 547 EHR functional requirements in 26 topic areas and found them to be valuable but in need of further refinement and prioritization. Work began in 2014 to develop a shortened high priority list of requirements and provide guidance to improve their use. Through a modified Delphi process that included key document review, selection criteria, multiple rounds of voting, and small group discussion, a multistakeholder work group identified and refined 47 items on the basis of earlier requirements to form the 2015 Children's EHR Format Priority List and developed 16 recommended uses of the Format. The full report of the Format enhancement activities is publicly available. In this article, we aim to promote awareness of these high priority EHR functional requirements for the care of children, sharpen industry focus on adopting these changes, and align all stakeholders in prioritizing specific health information technology functionalities including those essential for well-child preventive care, medication management, immunization tracking, and growth data for specific pediatric subgroups.

Effective design of health information technology (HIT) for patient-centered care requires consideration of workflow from the patient's perspective, termed 'patient-oriented workflow.' This approach organizes the building blocks of work around the patients who are moving through the care system. Patient-oriented workflow complements the more familiar clinician-oriented workflow approaches, and offers several advantages, including the ability to capture simultaneous, cooperative work, which is essential in care delivery. Patient-oriented workflow models can also provide an understanding of healthcare work taking place in various formal and informal health settings in an integrated manner. We present two cases demonstrating the potential value of patient-oriented workflow models. Significant theoretical, methodological, and practical challenges must be met to ensure adoption of patient-oriented workflow models. Patient-oriented workflow models define meaningful system boundaries and can lead to HIT implementations that are more consistent with cooperative work and its emergent features.

No abstract