Diagnosing Health Care Podcast

One year ago, on October 30, 2023, President Joe Biden signed an executive order laying the groundwork both for how federal agencies should responsibly incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) within their workflows and how each agency should regulate the use of AI in the industries it oversees. What has happened in the past year, and how might things change in the next?

On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Lynn Shapiro Snyder, Eleanor Chung, and Rachel Snyder Good reflect on what is new in health care AI as a result of the 2023 executive order and discuss what industry stakeholders should be doing to comply and prepare for future federal regulation of AI in health care.

Article – HTI-1 final rule: https://www.healthlawadvisor.com/oncs-information-blocking-enhancements-under-the-hti-1-rule-are-in-effect

Article – HTI-2 proposed rule: https://www.healthlawadvisor.com/as-the-window-for-comments-closes-on-onc-astps-hti-2-proposed-rule-whats-in-hti-2-and-what-does-it-mean-for-you

Webinar – New Final Regulation Prohibiting Algorithmic Discrimination by Health Care Providers and Payers: https://www.ebglaw.com/insights/events/new-final-regulation-prohibiting-algorithmic-discrimination-by-health-care-providers-and-payers

Webinar – Demystifying AI Tools in Health Care, An Introduction for Federal Policymakers: https://www.ebglaw.com/insights/events/alliance-for-health-policy-demystifying-ai-tools-in-health-care-an-introduction-for-federal-policymakers

Visit our site for related resources and email contact information: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc83.

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Workplace violence in health care settings is on the rise, capturing the attention of both state and federal lawmakers. As awareness grows, so too does legal scrutiny and the push for new regulations and enforcement. In these seemingly critical times, what should health care employers be thinking about and incorporating into their comprehensive strategies to prevent and address workplace violence?

On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Sharon Peters, Eric Neiman, and Avery Schumacher dissect the legal landscape surrounding health care workplace violence, examining the steps being taken at various levels of government and what they mean for health care providers and institutions. Join us as we explore the legal frameworks, emerging policies, and broader compliance implications for health care employers.

Check out our complimentary 50-state survey on workplace violence laws in health care.

Access the Hospital Association of Oregon’s workplace violence prevention toolkit.

Visit our site for related resources and email contact information: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc82

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

The game has changed—are you positioned to adapt? Over the past 12 months, the federal government has been heavily regulating private investment in health care entities. Simultaneously, multiple states have enacted or introduced new laws restricting or requiring approval of such investments. The question arises: What do you do if you already have investments in these health care entities?

 On this episode, Leslie Norwalk, Strategic Counsel at Epstein Becker Green (EBG), joins EBG attorneys Josh Freemire, Tim Murphy, and Ted Kennedy, Jr., to discuss how health care entities, investors, and board members should be responding to an evolving political and regulatory environment that has increased the scrutiny of private investment in health care entities.

Letter to Joint Agency RFI on Consolidation in Health Care Markets: https://www.ebgadvisors.com/insights/publications/leslie-norwalk-responds-to-joint-agency-rfi-on-consolidation-in-health-care-markets

Visit our site for related resources and email contact information: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc81.

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Knock, knock! If the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is already at your door, it may be too late. Enforcement is on the rise, and the microscope is fixed on controlled substances. What can industry stakeholders do to prevent penalties and protect themselves from DEA scrutiny?

On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Melissa Jampol, David Johnston, and Avery Schumacher discuss recent and pending updates to DEA rules and guidance, outline steps stakeholders can take to prepare for an inspection, and share tips on what to do when the DEA arrives.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc80

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Laboratories in the United States are facing a major regulatory landscape shift. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a new rule ending its historical blanket enforcement discretion over laboratory developed tests (LDTs). What does this mean for labs going forward?

On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys James Boiani, Rob Wanerman, and Megan Robertson lay out the new landscape, analyze existing and potential challenges, and identify key developments to watch for as this new regulatory era unfolds.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc79

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

In a recent landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine in the case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This ruling has significant implications for employers and other entities in the health care and life sciences industries, as it changes the way courts are likely to interpret and apply regulations issued by federal agencies.

On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys George Breen, Stuart Gerson, Rob Wanerman, and Paul DeCamp analyze the fallout of this monumental decision, discuss what it means for entities seeking to challenge ambiguous statutes and regulations, and assess how to proceed from here.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc78

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Will the reclassification of marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug disrupt the cannabis marketplace? What consequences must industry stakeholders consider if the Drug Enforcement Administration's proposal becomes a reality?

On this episode, special guests Anthony Minniti, a New Jersey-licensed pharmacist, and Stacey Udell, an accountant with expertise in representing cannabis operators across the United States, join Epstein Becker Green attorney Lisa Gora to discuss the regulatory domino effect and tax implications related to this major potential change to the cannabis industry.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc77

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Gender-affirming care has become the latest flashpoint in state legislatures and state and federal courts across the nation. States are divided, with some passing laws that seek to restrict access to gender-affirming care and others aiming to protect access. What is gender-affirming care? What risks does it pose to providers and patients? On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Jenny Nelson Carney, Lisa Pierce Reisz, and Erin Sutton dissect gender-affirming care: what it is, what it isn't, and what is at stake for everyone involved.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc76

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

After nearly two years of combined efforts from the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, the agencies jointly issued much-anticipated merger guidelines identifying the procedures and enforcement practices they will apply for evaluating potential mergers. What might these changes mean for hospitals, health systems, and other stakeholders in the health care industry? On this episode, we discuss some of the key changes in the finalized antitrust merger guidelines and what these guidelines mean for the agencies' approach to enforcement.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc75

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Under the Biden administration, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services published a health equity framework that drastically changed the playing field for health plans and other risk-bearing entities. In the wake of these changes, how can health plans, accountable care organizations, and other similar stakeholders successfully create and administer social determinants of health interventions as a means to advance health equity? On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Jackie Selby, Kevin Malone, and Marjorie Scher discuss the recent national focus on health equity, the actionable interventions behind the concept, and the responsibility of stakeholders in making care delivery more equitable.

Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc74

Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.

Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.