Increasing Access to Quality Cardiac Rehabilitation Care Act of 2025
Summary
SB 717, the Increasing Access to Quality Cardiac Rehabilitation Care Act of 2025, would amend the Medicare statute to expand access to cardiac rehabilitation and pulmonary rehabilitation services. The bill broadens who may prescribe the exercise component of these programs by allowing not only physicians, but also physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and clinical nurse specialists to do so. It also updates the setting for cardiac rehabilitation so that services may be furnished in the “office setting” rather than only in a physician’s office, which is intended to make program delivery more flexible.
The bill applies these changes to Medicare-covered items and services furnished beginning six months after enactment. In practical terms, it would modify sections 1861(eee) and 1861(fff) of the Social Security Act, affecting Medicare beneficiaries who need cardiac or pulmonary rehabilitation and the providers and facilities that deliver those services. By easing prescribing and site-of-service requirements, the bill is designed to reduce administrative barriers and potentially speed access to rehabilitation care.
Impact
SB 717 would amend federal Medicare law, specifically the definitions and coverage rules for cardiac rehabilitation and pulmonary rehabilitation under title XVIII of the Social Security Act. It would expand provider authority to include physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and clinical nurse specialists for prescribing exercise in these programs, and it would loosen the cardiac rehabilitation site requirement from a physician’s office to an office setting. The bill would directly affect Medicare beneficiaries, rehabilitation providers, and clinicians who supervise or prescribe these services, with implementation beginning six months after enactment.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill. It was introduced by Senators Capito and Klobuchar, indicating bipartisan sponsorship, and the bill’s purpose is framed as improving access to clinically important rehabilitation services. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes showing opposition or support beyond introduction and referral, but the bill’s language reflects a consensus-oriented effort to streamline access rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials, but the likely policy questions involve whether expanding prescribing authority to non-physician clinicians and broadening the permissible service setting could affect oversight, quality control, or program administration. Any concerns would likely come from stakeholders focused on Medicare program integrity, provider scope-of-practice boundaries, or whether the changes could alter how cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation are supervised and reimbursed.