Organizational and legal aspects of providing medical care using telemedicine technologies in Russian Federation and foreign countries

The global telemedicine technology (TMT) regulatory landscape is currently evolving in a number of ways. The goal is to carry out an analytical examination of the institutional and legal frameworks for medical treatment including telemedicine consultation (TMC) in Russian Federation and foreign countries. The regulatory legal regulation of 22 international healthcare systems was included in the final version of the review. The review’s findings allow for the identification of the most important organizational and legal facets of delivering healthcare via TMC abroad: the majority of foreign nations lack comprehensive legal regulations governing the use of TMT in healthcare; the ability to establish a diagnosis within the context of TMC only follows an initial in-person consultation with a doctor; conducting TMC exclusively by licensed medical professionals and medical organizations; the option to conduct TMC via government-designed platforms and publicly accessible information platforms; requiring the patient to be informed about the benefits and drawbacks of TMT prior to consultation and to provide written or verbal informed consent; and requiring adherence to standards and recommendations during TMC, application, and in-person admission of the patient. The analysis demonstrates how commonplace TMC is abroad. However, there are currently no well-defined organizational or regulatory requirements for the use of TMC in the delivery of medical care, which calls for additional research into global experience and the identification of best practices that may be expanded throughout the Russian Federation.

1. Basco A., Beliz G., Coatz D., Garnero P. Industria 4.0: fabricando el futuro. Monografía del BID 647. 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.18235/0001229

2. Fatehi F., Samadbeik M., Kazemi A. What is digital health? Review of definitions. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2020; 275: 67–71. https://doi.org/10.3233/SHTI200696

3. Li H., Zhang T., Chi H., et al. Mobile health in China: Current status and future development. Asian J. Psychiatry. 2014; 10: 101–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2014.06.003

4. Bhatia A., Matthan R., Khanna T., Balsari S. Regulatory sandboxes: a cure for mHealth pilotitis? J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(9): e21276. https://doi.org/10.2196/21276

5. Pappas Y., Vseteckova J., Mastellos N., et al. Diagnosis and decision-making in telemedicine. J Patient Exp. 2019; 6(4): 296–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/2374373518803617

6. Hartasanchez S.A., Heen A.F., Kunneman M., et al. Remote shared decision making through telemedicine: a systematic review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns. 2022; 105(2): 356–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.06.012

7. Uscher-Pines L., Parks A.M., Sousa J., et al. Appropriateness of telemedicine versus inperson care: a qualitative exploration of psychiatrists’ decision making. Psychiatr Serv. 2022; 73(8): 849–855. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.202100519

8. Borghini A., Mantoan D., Paone S., et al. The Italian investment in telemedicine: a breakthrough model of care in primary care. Eur. J. Public Health. 2022; 32(3): 420. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac129.420

9. Wang Z., Xu R., Liu Y., Li Y. Licensing policy and platform models of telemedicine: a multi-case study from China. Front Public Health. 2023; 11: 1108621. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1108621

10. Shachar C., Gupta A., Katznelson G. Modernizing medical licensure to facilitate telemedicine delivery after the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Health Forum. 2021; 2(5): e210405. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.0405

11. Fields B.G. Regulatory, Legal, and Ethical Considerations of telemedicine. Sleep Med Clin. 2020; 15(3): 409–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsmc.2020.06.004

12. Koumpias A.M., Fleming O., Lin L.A. Association of licensure and relationship requirement waivers with out-of-state tele-mental health care, 2019–2021. Health Aff Sch. 2024; 2(4): qxae026. https://doi.org/10.1093/haschl/qxae026

13. Raghu G., Mehrotra A. Licensure laws and other barriers to telemedicine and telehealth: an urgent need for reform. Lancet Respir Med. 2023; 11(1): 11–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(22)00482-9

14. Faget K.Y. Telehealth practice standards with emphasis on the United States: what telerehabilitation providers need to know. Telerehabilitation. 2022; 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-82486-6.00028-9

15. Greenhalgh T., Procter R., Wherton J., et al. What is quality in assisted living technology? The ARCHIE framework for effective telehealth and telecare services. BMC Med. 2015; 13: 91. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0279-6

16. Vergouw J.W., Smits-Pelser H., Kars M.C. Barriers and facilitators of older adults towards eHealth in general practice: a qualitative study. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2020; 21: e54. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1463423620000547

17. Goins R.T., Williams K.A., Carter M.W., et al. Perceived barriers to health care access among rural older adults: a qualitative study. J Rural Health. 2005; 21(3): 206–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-0361.2005.tb00084.x

18. Lin J.C., Humphries M.D., Shutze W.P., et al. Telemedicine platforms and their use in the coronavirus disease-19 era to deliver comprehensive vascular care. J Vasc Surg. 2021; 73(2): 392–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2020.06.051

19. Waller M., Stotler C. Telemedicine: a Primer. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2018; 18(10): 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11882-018-0808-4

20. Zhao F., Li M., Tsien J.Z. Technology platforms for remote monitoring of vital signs in the new era of telemedicine. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2015; 12(4): 411–429. https://doi.org/10.1586/17434440.2015.1050957

21. Kouri P., Reponen, J., Ahonen O., et al. Telemedicine and eHealth in Finland: On the Way to Digitalization – from Individual TeleHealth Applications to Connected Health. In Malina Jordanova, Frank Lievens, Anton Vladzymyrskyy (Eds.) A Century of Telemedicine: Curatio Sine Distantia et Tempora A World Wide Overview – Part II. Sofia: International Society for Telemedicine & eHealth. 2018; 29–63. https://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/166525

22. Haddad P.J. Electronic prescriptions for controlled substances. Mich Med. 2017; 116(2): 10–11. PMID: 25924269

23. Graf A., Fehring L., Henningsen M., Zinner M. Going digital in Germany: An exploration of physicians’ attitudes towards the introduction of electronic prescriptions – A mixed methods approach. Int J Med Inform. 2023; 174: 105063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105063

24. Bulut S., Yıldız A., Kaya S. Evaluation of transition to electronic prescriptions in Turkey: perspective of family physicians. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019; 8(1): 40–48. https://doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2018.89

25. Van Laere S., Cornu P., Dreesen E., et al. Electronic prescriptions: why community pharmacists still treat them as paper-based? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2019; 258: 53–54. PMID: 30942713

26. Oravainen T., Airaksinen M., Hannula K., Kvarnstrom K. How Physicians Renew Electronic Prescriptions in Primary Care: Therapeutic Decision or Technical Task? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(20): 10937. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182010937

27. Haux R., Koch S., Lovell N.H. Health-enabling and ambient assistive technologies: past, present, future. Yearb Med Inform. 2016; 25(S01): S76–S91. https://doi.org/10.15265/IYS-2016-s008

28. Salmanizadeh F., Ameri A., Bahaadinbeigy K. Methods of reimbursement for telemedicine services: a scoping review. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2022; 36(1): 481–490. https://doi.org/10.47176/mjiri.36.68

29. Scott Kruse C., Karem P., Brooks M. Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: A systematic review. J Telemedicine and Telecare. 2018; 24(1): 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X16674087

30. Raes S., Trybou J., Annemans L. How to pay for telemedicine: a comparison of ten health systems. Health Syst Reform. 2022; 8(1): 2116088. https://doi.org/10.1080/23288604.2022.2116088

31. Abbasi-Feinberg F. Telemedicine coding and reimbursement – current and future trends. Sleep Med Clin. 2020; 15(3): 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsmc.2020.06.002

32. Rudin R.S., Auerbach D., Zaydman M., et al. Paying for telemedicine. Am J Manag Care. 2014; 20(12): 983–985. PMID: 25526386

33. Rossano A., Crijns T., Ring D., Reichenberg J. Clinician preferences for current and planned future use of telemedicine. Telemed J E Health. 2022; 28(9): 1293–1299. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2021.0486

34. Yaghobian S., Ohannessian R., Moulin T. France extends its tele-expertise funding model nationally after COVID-19. J Telemed Telecare. 2022; 28(3): 233–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X211067067