Congress passed a federal appropriations bill this month extending Medicare telehealth coverage and prolonging hospital-at-home programs — a move that reiterates the federal government’s commitment to supporting biomedical research, according to administrators at Penn Medicine.
House Bill 7148, signed into law on Feb. 3, offers temporary reassurance to biomedical researchers by preserving pandemic-era health care flexibilities. Still, experts told The Daily Pennsylvanian that broader funding questions remain amid ongoing federal budget negotiations.
In a statement to the DP, Perelman School of Medicine Dean Jonathan Epstein wrote that the bill “provides welcome stability” for the biomedical research community and “reinforces the longstanding federal commitment to scientific progress.”
He added that the bill “allows investigators here at Penn, and across the country, to move forward with greater confidence in the near term.”
Epstein also cautioned about uncertainty surrounding federal research funding amid “ongoing budget and policy discussions,” stating that is “why continued engagement and advocacy are essential.”
One of the bill’s most immediate effects is the extension of Medicare telehealth flexibilities first introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the legislation, Medicare will continue reimbursing telehealth visits for a broader group of patients, including many living in urban and suburban areas who previously did not qualify.
Christina O’Malley — Penn Med’s head of digital and emerging care transformation — told the DP that the extension helps prevent patients from losing access to care.
“The telehealth waivers that were extended are actually allowing Medicare to continue paying for telehealth visits in an expanded capacity,” O’Malley said.
RELATED:
Penn Medicine’s top lawyer set to retire this June
Penn hospitals rank among highest for ER wait times across Philadelphia
Prior to pandemic-era changes, Medicare generally limited telehealth coverage to patients in designated rural areas or those physically located in medical facilities.
According to O’Malley, Penn Med had been preparing for what she described as a potential “telehealth cliff” if Congress failed to act.
“If that funding were to go away, most Medicare patients — anyone that’s just at home in the suburbs or in the city — would not have been able to have access to a telehealth visit,” O’Malley said.
At Penn Med alone, telehealth has scaled dramatically since 2020 to “two and a half to three million patients served,” according to O’Malley.
The appropriations bill also extends the federal Acute Hospital Care at Home waiver, which would allow hospitals to deliver inpatient-level care in patients’ homes using remote monitoring and in-person visits.
O’Malley said the longer timeline is already influencing institutional strategy.
“Now that we have seen this extension through 2030, it’s really supercharged our ability to launch with confidence,” she said.
Penn Med is currently planning to launch its hospital-at-home program in April. Previously, the health system had delayed implementation due to “continued ambiguity around the hospital at home waiver.”
“The model could also expand system capacity,” O’Malley added.
“It’s definitely increasing access to care, because we’re actually adding more net beds to our health system availability,” she said. “That means less patients waiting, more patients getting fast access to care.”
The appropriations package also includes provisions targeting pharmacy benefit managers, the intermediaries that negotiate prescription drug prices.
For research institutions like Penn, Epstein emphasized that predictability in federal support remains critical for long-term planning.
Epstein emphasized that Penn Med is “proud to be among the nation’s top recipients of federal research support year after year,” but the “breakthroughs,” including CRISPR gene therapies and personalized cancer treatments, will require “sustained, predictable support that our teams can rely on as they plan their studies, hire teams, and conduct clinical trials.”
O’Malley also expressed that the extended programs could eventually become permanent.
“I’m really optimistic,” O’Malley said. “With additional years and additional data, there’s going to be more knowledge available to draw from and more enthusiasm to pass a permanent bill.”
Staff reporter Mariacristina Calcagno contributed reporting.
