The future of virtual care: 30% of U.S. medical visits could be remote by 2026 – but policy uncertainty looms

Key Takeaways:

• Telehealth could account for up to 30% of all U.S. medical appointments by 2026 — but only if federal policy supports long-term adoption.
• Mental health leads telehealth usage, with 38.3% of encounters conducted virtually in 2023, highlighting both patient demand and clinical adaptability.
• Despite robust infrastructure and patient interest, policy gaps around reimbursement, cross-state licensing, and audio-only visits threaten progress.

Virtual Care’s Potential — and the Policy Threat That Shadows It

Telehealth is poised to transform the delivery of healthcare across the United States, with a projected 25% to 30% of all medical visits occurring virtually by 2026, according to a forecast by healthcare IT consultancy ScienceSoft. Yet, this future hinges less on technology or patient demand than on a more uncertain force: federal legislation.

Although key Medicare telehealth flexibilities were extended earlier in the year, they are set to expire on 30 September, placing healthcare providers in a precarious position. The temporary nature of these extensions — and the exclusion of several widely-used pandemic-era programmes — has resulted in confusion and strategic hesitation for health systems attempting to plan for the future.

“Key obstacles to telemedicine adoption are related to regulations rather than technological barriers or lack of demand,” wrote Dr Gala Batsishcha, a healthcare IT consultant at ScienceSoft, in the company’s February forecast.

Mental Health: A Stronghold of Virtual Engagement

Among the various medical specialties, mental health services have emerged as a leader in telehealth adoption. In 2023, 38.3% of all mental health encounters in the U.S. were conducted via telehealth platforms. This sustained demand, even as general telehealth use has declined post-COVID, points to strong alignment between patient needs and clinical service delivery.

“The resilient utilisation in mental health shows that the necessary technology and demand are already in place,” said Batsishcha in the report. “The future of its adoption — whether it continues to increase or returns to pre-pandemic levels — largely depends on government decision-makers.”

This sustained virtual engagement reflects both patients’ comfort with remote mental health care and clinicians’ growing proficiency with digital platforms in this context.

Hospitals and Patients Are Ready — But Laws Lag Behind

According to Definitive Healthcare data, by early 2024, nearly 79% of U.S. hospitals had implemented some form of telehealth infrastructure. Patients, especially those in rural communities or with physical, mobility, or time constraints, continue to embrace virtual appointments for their convenience and accessibility.

The main obstacle, however, is not the readiness of hospitals or the enthusiasm of patients. It is the lack of durable public policy.

While Congress extended several Medicare flexibilities — such as enabling virtual visits from home and widening the types of healthcare professionals eligible to offer telehealth — many important provisions were left out. These include:

• Reimbursement for audio-only visits, which many patients with limited internet access rely on;
• Cross-state licensing reforms, which would ease access to specialists and alleviate regional disparities;
• Telehealth allowances within high-deductible health plans, which would increase affordability and uptake.

These omissions have curtailed telehealth’s broader potential and complicated planning for healthcare providers.

Clinician Perspectives: Balancing Efficiency and Caution

For clinicians, telehealth presents notable benefits, including reduced no-show rates, greater scheduling flexibility, and efficiency in handling low-acuity cases. Models such as remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital triage tools offer scalable solutions without the need for additional physical infrastructure — a vital consideration for resource-constrained practices.

Yet, reservations remain.

“It’s important to strike a balance here,” Batsishcha cautioned. “For routine follow-ups, medication refills, mental health consultations or minor ailments like colds and flu, virtual visits can be an excellent way to save time and reduce strain on the healthcare system. However, for more complex or urgent issues … an in-person visit is crucial for an accurate diagnosis and immediate intervention.”

Clinicians also express concern that critical symptoms may be overlooked without physical examinations and that relational trust between patients and providers could diminish if virtual care is overused or impersonal.

The Road Ahead: Policy Will Determine Progress

The trajectory of virtual care in the United States will ultimately be shaped by what Congress decides in the coming months. Following a continuing resolution in March, which extended current flexibilities through September, there have been calls — notably from the American Telemedicine Association (ATA) — urging lawmakers to make these changes permanent and to reinstate previously expired programmes.

Without decisive policy action, telehealth risks stagnating just as its infrastructure and user base reach maturity.

ScienceSoft remains optimistic, projecting that one-quarter to one-third of all medical visits in the U.S. could be conducted virtually by 2026. But the report stresses that this potential will only be realised if the federal government removes regulatory barriers and offers long-term clarity.

As Batsishcha summarised, “The necessary technology and demand are already in place. Key obstacles to telemedicine adoption are related to the regulations rather than technological barriers or lack of demand.”