Developing Telemental Health Partnerships Between State Medical Schools and Federally Qualified Health Centers: Navigating the Regulatory Landscape and Policy Recommendations

BackgroundFederally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) deliver care to 26 million Americans living in underserved areas, but few offer telemental health (TMH) services. The social missions of FQHCs and publicly funded state medical schools create a compelling argument for the development of TMH partnerships. In this paper, we share our experience and recommendations from launching TMH partnerships between 12 rural FQHCs and 3 state medical schools.ExperienceThere was consensus that medical school TMH providers should practice as part of the FQHC team to promote integration, enhance quality and safety, and ensure financial sustainability. For TMH providers to practice and bill as FQHC providers, the following issues must be addressed: (1) credentialing and privileging the TMH providers at the FQHC, (2) expanding FQHC Scope of Project to include telepsychiatry, (3) remote access to medical records, (4) insurance credentialing/paneling, billing, and supplemental payments, (5) contracting with the medical school, and (6) indemnity coverage for TMH.RecommendationsWe make recommendations to both state medical schools and FQHCs about how to overcome existing barriers to TMH partnerships. We also make recommendations about changes to policy that would mitigate the impact of these barriers. Specifically, we make recommendations to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid about insurance credentialing, facility fees, eligibility of TMH encounters for supplemental payments, and Medicare eligibility rules for TMH billing by FQHCs. We also make recommendations to the Health Resources and Services Administration about restrictions on adding telepsychiatry to the FQHCsâ Scope of Project and the eligibility of TMH providers for indemnity coverage under the Federal Tort Claims Act.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149739/1/jrh12323_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149739/2/jrh12323.pd

Identification of Candidate Genes for Dyslexia Susceptibility on Chromosome 18

Background: Six independent studies have identified linkage to chromosome 18 for developmental dyslexia or general reading ability. Until now, no candidate genes have been identified to explain this linkage. Here, we set out to identify the gene(s) conferring susceptibility by a two stage strategy of linkage and association analysis. Methodology/Principal Findings: Linkage analysis: 264 UK families and 155 US families each containing at least one child diagnosed with dyslexia were genotyped with a dense set of microsatellite markers on chromosome 18. Association analysis: Using a discovery sample of 187 UK families, nearly 3000 SNPs were genotyped across the chromosome 18 dyslexia susceptibility candidate region. Following association analysis, the top ranking SNPs were then genotyped in the remaining samples. The linkage analysis revealed a broad signal that spans approximately 40 Mb from 18p11.2 to 18q12.2. Following the association analysis and subsequent replication attempts, we observed consistent association with the same SNPs in three genes; melanocortin 5 receptor (MC5R), dymeclin (DYM) and neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally down-regulated 4-like (NEDD4L). Conclusions: Along with already published biological evidence, MC5R, DYM and NEDD4L make attractive candidates for dyslexia susceptibility genes. However, further replication and functional studies are still required.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Pancreatic Noradrenergic Nerves Are Activated by Neuroglucopenia But Not by Hypotension or Hypoxia in the Dog Evidence for Stress-specific and Regionally Selective Activation of the Sympathetic Nervous System

To determine if acute stress activates pancreatic noradrenergic nerves, pancreatic norepinephrine (NE) output (spillover) was measured in halothane-anesthetized dogs. Central neuroglucopenia, induced by intravenous 2-deoxy-D-glucose (12-DGJ 600 mg/kg + 13.5 mg/kg- ' per min') increased pancreatic NE output from a baseline of 380±100 to 1,490±340 pg/min (A = +1,110±290 pg/min, P < 0.01). Surgical denervation of the pancreas reduced this response by 90 % (A = +120±50 pg/ min, P < 0.01 vs. intact innervation), suggesting that 2-DG activated pancreatic nerves by increasing the central sympathetic outflow to the pancreas rather than by acting directly on nerves within the pancreas itself. These experiments provide the first direct evidence of stress-induced activation of pancreatic noradrenergic nerves in vivo. In contrast, neither hemorrhagic hypotension (50 mmHg) nor hypoxia (6-8 % 02) increased pancreatic NE output (A = +80±110 and-20±60 pg/min, respectively, P < 0.01 vs. neuroglucopenia) despite both producing increases of arterial plasma NE and epinephrine similar to glucopenia. The activation of pancreatic noradrenergic nerves is thus stress specific. Furthermore, because both glucopenia and hypotension increased arterial NE, yet only glucopenia activated pancreatic nerves, it is suggested that a regionally selective pattern of sympathetic activation can be elicited by acute stress, a condition in which sympathetic activation has traditionally been thought to be generalized and nondiscrete

Cardiovascular and Neuroendocrine Responses to Extended Laboratory Challenge

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a 2-hour laboratory challenge on heart rate, blood pressure, catecholamines, and cortisol; and investigate the contribution of the physical act of speaking on both neuroendocrine and cardiovascular measures. Using a within-subjects design, 14 subjects were tested individually during two separate laboratory sessions. During one session, subjects engaged in two cognitively demanding tasks for 2 hours. During the other session, subjects executed the verbal demands of the tasks for 2 hours, but cognitive demands were absent. During both sessions, blood pressure and heart rate were measured and arterialized blood samples were obtained for the measurement of epinephrine, norepinephrine, and cortisol. Subjects demonstrated significantly greater increases in systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, epinephrine, and cortisol during the cognitively challenging session than during the control session. It is concluded that sustained elevations in cardiovascular and neuroendocrine measures can be achieved in the laboratory, and that the effects of such tasks cannot be attributed solely to the physical demands of speaking. Implications for the measurement of circulating catecholamines and cortisol during laboratory studies are discussed