Telehealth, the provision of health care services to patients from providers who are not at the same location, has experienced a rapid escalation in use during the COVID-19 pandemic, among both privately-insured patients and Medicare beneficiaries. Before the pandemic, coverage of telehealth services under traditional Medicare was limited to beneficiaries living in rural areas only, with restrictions on where beneficiaries could receive these services and which providers could be paid to deliver them. Soon after the federal government declared a public health emergency due to COVID-19 in early 2020, Congress and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) expanded traditional Medicares coverage of telehealth services in order to make it easier for beneficiaries to get medical care and minimize their exposure to coronavirus in health care settings. When the public health emergency ends, however, Medicares coverage of telehealth services will revert back to the more limited availability that existed before the pandemic, unless policymakers take action to extend the expanded coverage.
In light of the rapid, but time-limited, expansion of telehealth coverage under traditional Medicare, this brief provides an overview of the changes made during the COVID-19 pandemic to Medicares coverage of telehealth. It also presents new analysis of Medicare beneficiaries utilization of telehealth between the summer and fall of 2020, and discusses issues and questions related to extending telehealth coverage under traditional Medicare beyond the public health emergency. Our analysis of beneficiaries use of telehealth services is based on survey data of Medicare beneficiaries living in the community from the CMS Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) Fall 2020 COVID-19 Supplement. All differences reported in the text are statistically significant, unless otherwise noted. (See Data and Methods for details.)
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage of telehealth services under traditional Medicare was limited. Medicare paid for approximately 100 services provided by telehealth, and there were limitations on how these services could be delivered and which beneficiaries could access them. Such limitations do not apply in Medicare Advantage plans, which have flexibility to offer additional telehealth benefits not covered by traditional Medicare outside of the public health emergency (see below for more information). Prior to the pandemic, the utilization of telehealth among traditional Medicare beneficiaries was extremely low, with only 0.3% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Part B using telehealth services in 2016, accounting for only 0.4% of traditional Medicare Part B spending. Similarly, analysis of primary care visits in traditional Medicare found that only 0.1% of these visits were provided via telehealth before the pandemic in February 2020.
To make it easier and safer for beneficiaries to seek medical care during the COVID-19 pandemic, the HHS Secretary waived certain restrictions on Medicare coverage of telehealth servicesfor traditional Medicare beneficiaries during the COVID-19 public health emergency, based on waiver authority included in theCoronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act(and as amended by theCARES Act). The waiver, effective for services starting on March 6, 2020, significantly loosened coverage restrictions for telehealth under traditional Medicare during the public health emergency, as described below. The public health emergency was most recently renewed in April 2021, and, according to the Biden Administration, is expected to remain in place for the duration of 2021.
Before the public health emergency, telehealth services were generally available only to beneficiaries in rural areas originating from a health care setting, such as a clinic or doctors office. Beneficiaries in urban areas were ineligible for telehealth services, and beneficiaries could not receive telehealth services in their own homes. During the public health emergency, beneficiaries in any geographic area can receive telehealth services, and can receive these services in their own home, rather than needing to travel to a distant site (i.e., a health care setting).
Under Medicares existing telehealth benefit, a telehealth visit must be conducted with two-way audio/video communications and the use of smartphones or audio-only telephones in lieu of video is not permitted. For the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency, telehealth services can be conducted via an interactive audio-video system, as well as using smartphones with real-time audio/video interactive capabilities without other equipment. Additionally, a limited number of telehealth services can be provided to patients via audio-only telephone or a smartphone without video.
Before the public health emergency, only physicians and certain other practitioners (such as physician assistants, clinical social workers, and clinical psychologists) were eligible to receive Medicare payment for telehealth services provided to eligible beneficiaries in traditional Medicare, and they must have treated the beneficiary receiving the services in the last three years. During the public health emergency, any health care professional that is eligible to bill Medicare for professional services can provide and bill for telehealth services, and does not need to have previously treated the beneficiary. Also, federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics are allowed to provide telehealth services to Medicare beneficiaries during the COVID-19 public health emergency; these settings were not authorized as providers of telehealth services for Medicare beneficiaries prior to the pandemic.
Before the public health emergency, traditional Medicare covered about 100 services that could be administered through telehealth, including office visits, psychotherapy, and preventive health screenings, among other services. During the public health emergency, the list of allowable telehealth services covered under traditional Medicare expanded to include emergency department visits, physical and occupational therapy, and certain other services. Some evaluation and management, behavioral health, and patient education services can be provided to patients via audio-only telephone.
Separate from Medicares coverage of telehealth services, traditional Medicare covers brief, virtual check-ins (also called brief communication technology-based services) via telephone or captured video image, andE-visits for all beneficiaries, regardless of whether they live in a rural area. Both of these services, which were not amended during the public health emergency, are more limited in scope than a full telehealth visit. For example, virtual check-ins can only be reported by providers with an established relationship to the patient, cannot be related to a recent medical visit (within the past 7 days), and cannot lead to a medical visit in the next 24 hours (or the soonest available appointment, and payment is intended to cover only 5-10 minutes of medical discussion.
Before the public health emergency, Medicares payment for a telehealth service was the same regardless of whether it was provided in a non-facility setting, such as a clinicians office, or a facility setting, such as a hospital outpatient department, and the payment rate was based on the lower amount paid to facility-based providers for a service delivered in person. (Under Medicares physician fee schedule, the payment to facility-based-providers for in-person services is lower than the payment to non-facility providers because Medicare makes a separate payment to facilities to cover practice expenses, such as physical space, medical supplies, medical equipment, and clinical staff time.) The rationale for using the lower facility payment amount for telehealth services was that practice expenses for the delivery of telehealth services should be lower than those for an in-person visit.
During the public health emergency, Medicare pays for telehealth services, including those delivered via audio-only telephone, as if they were administered in person, with the payment rate varying based on the location of the provider, which means that Medicare pays more for a telehealth service provided by a doctor in a non-facility setting than by a doctor in a hospital outpatient department. This also means that during the public health emergency, doctors in non-facility settings are receiving a higher payment for services provided by telehealth than they did before the public health emergency.
Beneficiary cost sharing for telehealth services has not changed during the public health emergency. Medicare covers telehealth services under Part B, so beneficiaries in traditional Medicare who use these benefits are subject to the Part B deductible of $203 in 2021 and 20% coinsurance. However, the HHS Office of Inspector General hasprovided flexibilityfor providers to reduce or waive cost sharing for telehealth visits during the COVID-19 public health emergency, although there is no publicly-available data to indicate the extent to which providers may have done so. Most beneficiaries in traditional Medicare have supplemental insurance that may pay some or all of the cost sharing for covered telehealth services.
Separate from the time-limited expanded availability of telehealth services, CMS has granted providers participating in some alternative payments models, including Next Generation accountable care organizations (ACOs) and Medicare Shared Savings Program ACOs, greater flexibility to provide care through telehealth, including billing for telehealth services provided to both urban and rural beneficiaries and to beneficiaries when they are at home. Telehealth flexibilities in the Next Generation ACO demonstration are granted via benefit enhancement waivers administered by CMS. From 2016-2018, few Next Generation ACOs received and implemented telehealth waivers (4 ACOs; 8% of all ACOs in the model).
Medicare Advantage plans have been able to offer additional telehealth benefits not covered by traditional Medicare outside of the public health emergency, including telehealth visits provided to enrollees in their own homes and services provided outside of rural areas. In 2021, virtually all Medicare Advantage plans (98%) offer a telehealth benefit.
Medicare Advantage plans are paid a capitated amount by Medicare to provide basic Medicare benefits covered under Parts A and B; legislative changes implemented in 2020 allow plans to include additional telehealth benefits beyond what traditional Medicare covers in their bids for basic benefits. Therefore, the cost of additional telehealth services offered by Medicare Advantage plans are reflected in the capitated payment that plans receive.
Medicare Advantage plans have flexibility to waive certain requirements with regard to coverage and cost sharing in cases of disaster or emergency, such as the COVID-19 outbreak. In response to the coronavirus pandemic,CMS has advised plans thatthey may waive or reduce cost sharing for telehealth services, as long as plans do this uniformly for all similarly situated enrollees. Many Medicare Advantage plans have waived or reduced cost sharing for enrollees for some or all services administered via telehealth during the public health emergency.
As of Fall 2020, six months after the expansion of telehealth benefits in traditional Medicare for the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly two-thirds of community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries who say they have a usual source of care (64%, or 33.6 million beneficiaries), such as a doctor or health professional, or a clinic, reported that their usual provider offers telehealth appointments, up from roughly 1 in 5 (18%, or 6.1 million) beneficiaries who said their usual provider offered telehealth before the pandemic (Figure 2; Table 1). (The majority of community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, 95% or 52.7 million, report having a usual source of care). Conversely, 13% of beneficiaries with a usual source of care said their provider does not currently offer telehealth, a substantial decrease compared to the 52% who said their provider did not offer telehealth before the COVID-19 pandemic.
While the reported availability of telehealth has increased during the pandemic, nearly a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care (23% or 11.9 million beneficiaries) said they do not know if their usual provider currently offers telehealth appointments.
The reported rates of beneficiaries who say their provider currently offers telehealth was similar across most demographic groups (Figure 3). However, a smaller share of Medicare beneficiaries living in rural areas than those living in urban areas said their provider currently offers telehealth (52% vs. 67%, respectively), and a larger share of rural beneficiaries report not knowing if their usual provider offers telehealth appointments than beneficiaries living in urban areas (30% vs 21%, respectively).
A larger share of Black Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care (23%) say their usual provider does not currently offer telehealth appointments than White (12%) and Hispanic (15%) beneficiaries with a usual source of care. Additionally, a larger share of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid (19%) say their usual provider does not currently offer telehealth appointments than Medicare beneficiaries who are not enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid (12%).
Among the two-thirds of Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care who reported in the Fall of 2020 that their usual provider offers telehealth during the pandemic (33.6 million beneficiaries), nearly half (45%, or 14.9 million beneficiaries) reported having a telehealth visit since July 2020. Some groups of Medicare beneficiaries were more likely than others to report having a telehealth visit with a doctor or other health professional since July 2020, including Medicare beneficiaries under age 65 with long-term disabilities, Black and Hispanic beneficiaries, Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in both Medicare and Medicaid, and beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions (Figure 4; Table 2).
Among Medicare beneficiaries who have a usual source of care and whose usual provider offers telehealth:
Notably, among Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care and whose usual provider offers telehealth, we found no significant difference between the share of rural and urban Medicare beneficiaries who had a telehealth visit (43% and 45%, respectively). However, based on the overall population in these groups, rural Medicare beneficiaries were less likely than urban beneficiaries to have a telehealth visit with a doctor or other health professional (21% vs. 28%, respectively). This difference is likely driven by the fact that rural Medicare beneficiaries were more likely than urban Medicare beneficiaries to say they do not know if their usual provider offers telehealth (30% vs. 21%, respectively).
Similarly, among Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care whose usual provider offers telehealth, we found that a larger share of Black and Hispanic beneficiaries had a telehealth visit compared to White beneficiaries (52%, 52%, and 43%). However, among the total Medicare population, the difference in the share of Black and White beneficiaries who reported having a telehealth visit was not statistically significant (30% vs. 26%), while a larger share of Hispanic beneficiaries than White beneficiaries had a telehealth visit (33% vs. 26%). For Black Medicare beneficiaries, this result is likely related to the fact that nearly a quarter of Black beneficiaries overall (23%) say their usual provider does not offer telehealth appointments, compared to 12% of White beneficiaries and 15% of Hispanic beneficiaries.
Among Medicare beneficiaries with a usual source of care whose provider offers telehealth appointments, the majority of those who had a telehealth visit since July 2020 accessed the service by telephone (56%), compared to 28% who reported having a telehealth visit by video and 16% who used both telephone and video (Figure 5; Table 3). This may be related to the fact that while more than 8 in 10 Medicare beneficiaries report having access to the internet (83%), smaller shares say they own a computer (64%) or a smartphone (70%) (Figure 6, Table 4).
There are notable differences by demographic characteristics in how beneficiaries have accessed telehealth services during the pandemic and the availability of technology that enables access to telehealth, for example:
Our analysis finds that 1 in 4 Medicare beneficiaries have had a telehealth visit during the COVID-19 public health emergency, representing a substantial increase in use since before the pandemic. Our finding that, among beneficiaries whose provider offers telehealth, a greater share of those with disabilities, with low incomes, and in communities of color have used telehealth suggests that the temporary expansion of telehealth coverage may be helping some of Medicares more disadvantaged populations continue to access needed care. At the same time, in light of our finding that a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries overall (and an even larger share of those in rural areas) do not know if their doctor currently offers telehealth, efforts to increase awareness of covered telehealth services under Medicare during the public health emergency could help to broaden its reach.
Currently, policymakers are considering a variety of proposals to expand some or all of the existing flexibilities surrounding telehealth services under Medicare beyond the public health emergency, and many have expressed support for doing so. Among the telehealth-related bills that have been introduced in the 117th Congress include proposals to permanently cover some of the telehealth expansions provided during the public health emergency, expand Medicare-covered mental health services and evaluation and management services administered via telehealth, and expand the scope of providers eligible for payment for telehealth services covered by Medicare. Other bills are aimed at assessing the impact of expanded telehealth services on the quality of patient care and program spending.
Under Medicares existing telehealth benefit, a telehealth visit must be conducted with two-way audio/video technology, while under the current public health emergency waiver, a limited number of telehealth services can be provided to patients via audio-only telephone. Given that the majority of Medicare beneficiaries in our analysis reported accessing telehealth services by telephone only, an expanded telehealth benefit that requires two-way video communication could be a barrier to care for subgroups of the Medicare population that relied more heavily on telephones than video-capable devices during the pandemic.
MedPAC has recommended that Medicare continue a modified version of expanded telehealth coverage for another year or two after the public health emergency ends, giving Medicare time to assess the effects of telehealth use on total costs, access, and quality of care. During this additional time, MedPAC recommends that Medicare pay for specified telehealth services regardless of where a beneficiary lives; cover some additional telehealth services beyond those covered prior to the public health emergency if there is potential for clinical benefit; and cover audio-only telehealth visits if there is potential for clinical benefit. MedPAC has also recommended that payment for telehealth services after the public health emergency revert to the lower facility-based payment rate in effect before the pandemic, and that providers should not be allowed to waive or reduce beneficiary cost sharing.
Expanded coverage of telehealth beyond the public health emergency could affect the quality of patient care as well as program and beneficiary spending. Broadening telehealth coverage has the potential to improve access to needed care, but there is uncertainty as to whether it would lead to an overall increase or decrease in program spending. Some telehealth services may be substitutes for in-person care, such as a behavioral health care visit, though easier access to telehealth could lead to an overall increase in visits and costs. Other telehealth services may not fully replace the need for (or occurrence of) an in-person visit, such as a visit to evaluate a skin rash or where lab work is determined to be needed. In building evidence on the cost and quality impacts of telehealth use in Medicare, the Administration could also potentially gain insights based on telehealth use by enrollees in Medicare Advantage plans, or by testing different approaches through Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation models.
The potential expansion of telehealth coverage brings with it concerns about the potential for fraudulent activity. There have been several large fraud cases involving telehealth companies in recent years, most of which involved the submission of fraudulent claims for items, services, and tests to Medicare and other insurers that were never given or administered to patients. HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is conducting several studies to assess the appropriateness of use of telehealth during the public health emergency, including an analysis of provider billing patterns in order to identify providers that could pose a risk for program integrity and an audit of telehealth services under Part B to assure that services are meeting Medicare requirements. MedPAC has recommended that Medicare apply additional scrutiny to outlier clinicians who deliver more telehealth services than others, as well as requiring in-person visits before clinicians can order high-cost equipment or services for beneficiaries.
The temporary expansion of coverage for telehealth services has allowed many people with Medicare to access medical care during the coronavirus pandemic. Given that the temporary waiver of restrictions on coverage of telehealth services under Medicare will come to an end with the expiration of the public health emergency, the question of whether and how to ensure continued access to these services, while balancing concerns about quality of care and spending, looms large.
In order to determine the share of Medicare beneficiaries whose provider offers telehealth, beneficiaries who answered affirmatively to the question Is there a particular doctor or other health professional, or a clinic you usually go to when you are sick or for advice about your health? (9,216 out of 9,686 respondents) were asked Does your usual provider offer telephone or video appointments, so that you dont need to physically visit their office or facility? (5,644 respondents answered affirmatively).
In order to determine the share of Medicare beneficiaries who had a telehealth visit, beneficiaries with a usual source of care whose usual provider offers telehealth appointments were asked Since July 1, 2020, have you had an appointment with a doctor or other health professional by telephone or video? (2,515 respondents answered affirmatively). Similarly, beneficiaries with a usual source of care whose provider offers telehealth were asked Did your usual provider offer telephone or video appointments before the coronavirus pandemic? (1,035 respondents answered affirmatively).
To determine how beneficiaries accessed telehealth appointments, beneficiaries who had a telehealth appointment since July 2020 were asked Was it a telephone appointment, video appointment, or both? The majority of Medicare beneficiaries who had a telehealth visit since July 2020 had a visit via telephone (n=1,460), while fewer had a telehealth visit via video (n=653) or via both telephone and video (n=393).
Based on the questionnaire skip patterns, beneficiaries were only asked about their use of telehealth if they answered affirmatively that they had a usual source of care and that their usual provider offers telehealth. In order to determine the share of Medicare beneficiaries who had a telehealth visit among Medicare beneficiaries overall, we created a categorical variable that included beneficiaries whose provider did not offer telehealth or it was unknown. The variable had three categories: 1) usual provider offers telehealth and beneficiary had a telehealth visit (n=2,515); 2) usual provider offers telehealth and beneficiary did not have a telehealth visit (n=3,074); 3) usual provider does not offer telehealth or it was unknown (n=4,097).
Results from all statistical tests were reported with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.
- Madras HC asks Tamil Nadu govt to submit report on Covid ... - July 25th, 2021
- Covid-19 Pill Race Heats Up as Japanese Firm Vies With Pfizer, Merck - WSJ - The Wall Street Journal - July 25th, 2021
- Telehealth leapt forward with COVID-19. Who was left behind? - Los Angeles Times - July 25th, 2021
- Texas has seen nearly 9000 COVID-19 deaths since February. All but 43 were unvaccinated people. - The Texas Tribune - July 25th, 2021
- COVID-19 cases increasing in King County: Vaccination continues to be our best protection - Public Health Insider - July 25th, 2021
- The Most Influential Spreader of Coronavirus Misinformation Online - The New York Times - July 25th, 2021
- Shiawassee County officials will return COVID-19 relief aid bonuses they gave themselves - Detroit Free Press - July 25th, 2021
- As the pandemic wears on, some Americans could need Covid-19 booster shots - Vox.com - July 25th, 2021
- Fourth wave of COVID-19 pandemic is around the corner, health experts say - FOX 13 Tampa Bay - July 25th, 2021
- Can Japanese Natto Beans Help Fight Covid-19? What This Study Really Showed - Forbes - July 25th, 2021
- When will COVID-19 vaccines be fully approvedand does it matter whether they are? - Science Magazine - July 25th, 2021
- COVID Vaccines And Infertility? How Misinformation Spreads In 6 Steps : Shots - Health News - NPR - July 25th, 2021
- US virus cases nearly triple in 2 weeks amid misinformation - Associated Press - July 25th, 2021
- As COVID-19 surges again, what experts say about the millions of unvaccinated - ABC News - July 16th, 2021
- COVID-19: What you need to know about the coronavirus pandemic on 16 July - World Economic Forum - July 16th, 2021
- Athens area COVID-19 update: Oconee leads in vaccinated %, Barrow has most new infections - Online Athens - July 16th, 2021
- Doctors Online Provided Lifeline From Afar While Covid-19 Swept Through India - The Wall Street Journal - July 16th, 2021
- Sources - Aaron Judge among six New York Yankees to test positive for COVID-19 - ESPN - July 16th, 2021
- Panel approves spending of nearly $1B in COVID-19 relief - Associated Press - July 16th, 2021
- COVID-19 heightened racial issues in the US: Report - ABC News - July 16th, 2021
- COVID-19 Daily Update 7-15-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - July 16th, 2021
- Rhode Island to close 6 school COVID-19 testing sites - Associated Press - July 16th, 2021
- COVID-19 pandemic leads to major backsliding on childhood vaccinations, new WHO - UNICEF - July 16th, 2021
- Two NFL teams remain under the 50 percent COVID-19 vaccination threshold, per report - CBS Sports - July 16th, 2021
- State and Local Governments: Fiscal Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Selected States - Government Accountability Office - July 16th, 2021
- Clues About MIS-C and COVID-19 in Kids - The Atlantic - July 16th, 2021
- U.S. COVID-19 cases more than double in two weeks as delta variant spreads fast, and WHO warns 'pandemic nowhere near finished' - MarketWatch - July 16th, 2021
- Inslee to announce winner of $1 million COVID-19 vaccine lottery prize today - KING5.com - July 16th, 2021
- Lost Your COVID-19 Vaccination Card? Use this Handy App to Retrieve Your Info County of Union, New Jersey - UCNJ.org - July 16th, 2021
- A Breathalyzer to Detect Covid-19? Scientists Are on It. - The New York Times - July 16th, 2021
- Inslee rescinds two proclamations related to the COVID-19 pandemic | Governor Jay Inslee - Governor Jay Inslee - July 14th, 2021
- In Cuba, Covid-19 Stress Pushes Unrest to the Edge - The Wall Street Journal - July 14th, 2021
- COVID-19 Daily Update 7-14-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - July 14th, 2021
- EXPLAINER: Are we going to need COVID-19 booster shots? - NEWS10 ABC - July 14th, 2021
- Covid-19 Vaccines Are Becoming Mandatory in Parts of China - The Wall Street Journal - July 14th, 2021
- Will COVID-19 change science? Past pandemics offer clues - Science Magazine - July 14th, 2021
- Guests leave Singapore cruise after nearly 3000 confined onboard over COVID-19 case - Reuters - July 14th, 2021
- Unvaccinated may require tougher tactics amid COVID-19 surge - Los Angeles Times - July 14th, 2021
- COVID Cases In Parts Of Missouri And Arkansas Surge To Levels Not Seen Since Winter - NPR - July 14th, 2021
- Tourism not contributing to surge of COVID-19 infections in Greece - Reuters - July 14th, 2021
- This Brazillian Med Student Is Unlocking Mysteries Of The Covid-19 Infodemic - Forbes - July 14th, 2021
- University Awarded $1.4M To Address Impacts Of COVID-19 News Center - Montclaire News - July 14th, 2021
- China to start giving COVID-19 shots to teenagers this month - Reuters - July 14th, 2021
- Dutch COVID-19 infections soar by 500% in a week - Associated Press - July 14th, 2021
- South Africas Looting, Violence Reflect Inequalities Exacerbated by Covid-19 Pandemic - The Wall Street Journal - July 14th, 2021
- Greene's Deceptive Claims of Forced COVID-19 Vaccinations and Vaccination 'Deaths' - FactCheck.org - July 14th, 2021
- What's the best way to protect young Virginians from COVID-19? Experts say it's getting more adults immunized. - Fauquier Times - July 14th, 2021
- He wished he had gotten the vaccine: Local man battling COVID-19 from ICU for months - WSB Atlanta - July 14th, 2021
- Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19... : American Journal of Therapeutics - LWW Journals - July 14th, 2021
- The Red/Blue Divide in COVID-19 Vaccination Rates is Growing - Kaiser Family Foundation - July 10th, 2021
- COVID-19 Daily Update 7-9-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - July 10th, 2021
- COVID-19 In Maryland: More Than 100 New Cases Reported Friday - CBS Baltimore - July 10th, 2021
- COVID-19 outbreak in Kitsap jail infected 13 inmates, three remain in isolation - Kitsap Sun - July 10th, 2021
- COVID-19 Daily Update 7-8-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - July 10th, 2021
- COVID-19 vaccination clinic schedule for the week of July 12 - City of Fort Worth - July 10th, 2021
- WV DHHR: COVID-19 Daily Update 7-7-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - July 10th, 2021
- WHO recommends life-saving interleukin-6 receptor blockers for COVID-19 and urges producers to join efforts to rapidly increase access - World Health... - July 10th, 2021
- A VCU-led study conducted early in COVID-19 could help confront the next health crisis - VCU News - June 30th, 2021
- Mass. Making a Series of Changes to Its COVID-19 Reporting Dashboard - NBC10 Boston - June 30th, 2021
- COVID-19 Daily Update 6-30-2021 - West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources - June 30th, 2021
- Health Workforce in COVID-19 Action Series: Time to Protect. Invest. Together. - World Health Organization - June 30th, 2021
- Oil to sustain surprise rally despite Iran, third COVID-19 wave threat: Reuters poll - Reuters - June 30th, 2021
- COVID-19: What you need to know about the coronavirus pandemic on 30 June - World Economic Forum - June 30th, 2021
- EUAs And The FDAS Fight Against COVID-19: An Evolving Landscape - JD Supra - June 30th, 2021
- How The CDCs Blindspots Complicated The Fight Against COVID-19 - FiveThirtyEight - June 30th, 2021
- Cancer Detection, Surgical Treatments Negatively Impacted by COVID-19 Pandemic - Pharmacy Times - June 30th, 2021
- Heart inflammation after COVID-19 shots higher than expected in study of U.S. military - Reuters - June 30th, 2021
- 99% of WNBA vaccinated against COVID-19, but what about other sports leagues? - WKRN News 2 - June 30th, 2021
- Florence Nightingale in the age of Covid-19 - STAT - June 30th, 2021
- PCR tests for COVID-19 to be offered at Wichitas Dwight D. Eisenhower National Airport - KSN-TV - June 30th, 2021
- Euro 2020 linked to almost 2,000 Scottish COVID-19 cases - The Athletic - June 30th, 2021
- US had nearly 17 million undiagnosed COVID-19 cases in early months of pandemic: Study - ABC News - June 30th, 2021
- Public Health Officials Announce More Than 80 COVID-19 Cases Now Associated with Youth Camp Outbreak | IDPH - IDPH - June 28th, 2021
- Texas A&M COVID-19 Transmission Study Expands To Adults Ages 18-29 - Texas A&M Today - Texas A&M University Today - June 28th, 2021
- Share of COVID-19 cases caused by more infectious Delta variant more than double in Germany - Reuters - June 28th, 2021
- Treatment study in Austin seeking people currently infected with COVID-19 - KXAN.com - June 28th, 2021
- What to Know About COVID-19 and Epilepsy - Healthline - June 28th, 2021
- Testing Remains a Critical Piece in Fighting COVID-19 | Utah Department of Health - Utah Department of Health - June 28th, 2021
- 95% of those who've died from COVID-19 in Wisconsin since March weren't vaccinated or fully vaccinated, officials say - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel - June 28th, 2021
- Trauma Patients with COVID-19 Face Greater Risk of Complications and Death - pennmedicine.org - June 28th, 2021