Governments now prioritize telehealth

This marks the shift from telehealth as a regulatory exception to telehealth as a tool governments now need to keep primary care functioning. Kry spent its early years convincing regulators to allow remote prescribing and reimbursement, then used patient demand and public payer contracts to prove the model. By 2023, the bottleneck had moved from winning permission to scaling clinician supply and local operating depth across markets.

• In Europe, the real barrier was not video technology, it was payment and care delivery rules. Kry says it first had to secure reimbursement infrastructure, and in many markets payment still followed physical clinics, which is why digital players often add clinics or partnerships instead of staying purely virtual.
  1 sacra
• Governments became more receptive as health systems hit visible limits, long waits, staff shortages, rural access gaps, and post pandemic backlog. Recent EU and UK health policy still centers digital care, community based primary care, and workforce flexibility, which fits Kry's model of moving routine care out of traditional clinics.
  3 europa 4 gov 5 oecd 6 who
• That policy opening favors scaled operators over software only vendors. Kry combines contracted doctors, payer relationships, prescription and lab integrations, and local compliance work across countries. Smaller telehealth startups can offer visits, but replicating country by country public payer access is much harder and slower.
  1 sacra 2 sacra 7 livi

The next phase is less about legalizing telehealth and more about redesigning national primary care around it. As governments push more care into community and digital channels, the winners will be the providers that can plug into public payment systems, absorb more patient volume with AI and workflow software, and still deliver in person follow up when needed.