The bill impacts existing state laws by explicitly including telehealth interactions in the definition of patient visits for FQHCs and RHCs. By doing so, it permits health care providers to engage with patients remotely without necessitating in-person visits, which is particularly salient given the ongoing repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic. These amendments open pathways for improved healthcare access, decrease potential barriers for low-income populations, and adapt the Medi-Cal program to contemporary healthcare practices and technologies.
Assembly Bill 2164, introduced by Assembly Members Robert Rivas and Salas, aims to amend Section 14132.100 of the Welfare and Institutions Code to expand telehealth provisions within California's Medi-Cal program. This bill recognizes telehealth as a viable method for delivering healthcare, allowing encounters between patients and health care providers through both synchronous and asynchronous methods. It ensures that these visits, particularly through federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) and rural health clinics (RHCs), are eligible for reimbursement under the Medi-Cal program, thereby enhancing accessibility to health services for low-income individuals.
The sentiment surrounding AB 2164 appears to be positive, with strong support from various health advocacy groups and legislators who view the expansion of telehealth as a necessary advancement in the provision of health services. Recognizing telehealth's role in mitigating access barriers for underserved communities highlights a commitment to improving health equity. However, there may be underlying concerns about regulatory frameworks and the adequacy of provider reimbursement rates which could affect stakeholders differently.
While overall support for the bill is evident, there are points of contention regarding the implementation of new telehealth regulations. As the bill mandates the department to adopt further regulations and report to the Legislature, uncertainties remain about how these regulations will affect provider operation and reimbursement processes. Critics may argue that the temporary nature of these provisions—set to expire 180 days after the termination of the COVID-19 emergency—could undermine the long-term viability of telehealth services in California.