Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telehealth Practice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory committee reviews telehealth findings; flags confidentiality and interstate-practice questions
Summary
BSRB advisory members reviewed telehealth survey responses showing both benefits (access, rural reach) and concerns (connectivity, client privacy, insurance barriers, applying state practice rules across state lines); members suggested clarifying guidance and possible regulatory language on confidentiality and client location.
Get email alerts on the Telehealth Practice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The advisory committee spent substantial time Oct. 14 discussing telehealth issues raised in the psychologist survey.
David Fye told members that 236 licensed psychologists answered the telehealth question and that 142 reported no issues; staff compiled common positive and negative themes. Positive remarks included improved accessibility and benefits for rural outreach; negative themes included connectivity and Internet problems, clients and clinicians not being in secure/private locations during sessions, insurance barriers, and difficulty applying state regulations across state lines.
Committee members described context-dependent use: some patient groups (chronic pain, rural clients, college students who relocate) rely heavily on telehealth, while other populations and trainees show a preference to return to in‑person care. Members suggested concrete steps: encourage clinicians to ask clients about privacy and location at the start of sessions; consider regulatory language or guidance addressing confidentiality and client location; and ensure exam and licensure processes make accommodations visible to applicants.
Why it matters: Telehealth is widely used but poses confidentiality, competency and cross‑jurisdictional questions that touch on both public protection and providers’ ability to deliver services.
What’s next: Staff will consider whether to propose regulatory guidance or model language to the board and ensure application materials clearly describe how to request exam accommodations.

