New 50-State Telemedicine Survey Finds Significant Progress in Commercial Payer Laws Nationwide

02 December 2019 Health Care Law Today Blog
Author(s): Nathaniel M. Lacktman

For years, Foley has monitored legal policy in the telemedicine and digital health industry, following how advances in technology have coupled with improved state regulations to supercharge the growth of telehealth and virtual care services in the United States. We now share the results of our 2019 survey, which confirm significant legal advancements supporting the industry. We decided to share our findings to help hospitals, provider groups, telehealth entrepreneurs, and policymakers better understand the current state of affairs and advocate for change to improve access to and meaningful coverage and reimbursement of telehealth services. 

In our original 2014 Telemedicine Survey, 87% of surveyed providers reported they did not expect their patients to use telemedicine. In a follow-up survey three years later, our 2017 findings reported a surging demand in telemedicine services, with three quarters of surveyed providers stating they had already implemented, or were planning to implement, telemedicine services.  Fast-forward another two years and, while reimbursement constraints remain a major frustration for telehealth, the policy landscape has significantly improved. 

Foley’s 50-state survey of telehealth commercial payer statutes examines each individual state and the District of Columbia (DC). We provide the actual language of all the statutes and regulations and have created a multistate table and various heat maps to better illustrate the landscape and give policymakers and industry advocates a macro perspective. Our summaries and analyses reveal trends and patterns, and  highlight subtle but important differences between state law language. 

Coverage Provisions

50-State Telemedicine Survey

While it is true that clarity of coverage and limitations on reimbursement remain  major frustrations for telehealth growth, the legal landscape has materially improved. Currently, 42 states and DC maintain some sort of state telehealth commercial payer law; a sea change compared to a decade ago. California is the most recent example of a state amending its prior telehealth coverage law to improve it and better account for the current state of telehealth. 

Reimbursement Provisions

50-State Telemedicine Survey

In 2020, we anticipate more efforts among states to update  their prior telehealth coverage laws to keep pace with the industry’s growth. For that reason, we included in our survey model legislative language  for stakeholders to consider when advocating for changes to these state laws.  

With the holiday season upon us, we want to take a moment to extend our sincere gratitude and thanks to the telehealth advocacy groups, professional associations, academic medical centers, lawmakers, visionary start-ups, bold entrepreneurs, the Telehealth Resource Centers, the Center for Connected Health Policy, the American Telemedicine Association, the Center for Telehealth and e-Health Law, and all the individuals who have helped – and continue to help – make telehealth what it is today. You have been relentless in your energy, enthusiasm, and shared conviction that virtual care technologies can, and will, change the way healthcare is delivered.

To read the full survey, download the 2019 report.

Want to Learn More?

Visit for a complete list of events where members of the Foley Telemedicine and Digital Health Industry Team will be speaking.

For more information on telemedicine, telehealth, virtual care, remote patient monitoring, digital health, and other health innovations, including the team, publications, and representative experience, visit Foley’s Telemedicine & Digital Health Industry Team.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.