Physicians Come Out En Masse to Praise Remote Physiologic Monitoring

Read More
Physicians Come Out En Masse to Praise Remote Physiologic Monitoring
by Daniel Tashnek

Multiple Medicare administrative contractors (MACs) recently held a virtual, multi-jurisdictional meeting to discuss efficacy of remote physiologic monitoring (RPM) and remote therapeutic monitoring (RTM). The meeting lasted two-plus hours and included commentary from more than 50 subject matter experts, mostly physicians from various specialties who have experience with RPM and RTM.

Members of the Prevounce team, including myself, listened to the program, which was not only highly informative but encouraging. Not a single expert spoke negatively about their RPM or RTM experience. They spoke of the power of remote care to improve access, reduce inequities and social determinants of health barriers, strengthen patient engagement, cut costs, and ultimately improve outcomes. I am grateful to these physicians that they spoke up and took the time to share their stories.

As the founder of a healthcare software company that helps providers deliver remote patient management, chronic care management, and preventive services, I am obviously on the pro-RPM/RTM side. It was great to hear so many providers line up to talk through their positive experiences. Many of them were similar to the powerful anecdotes we hear every day at Prevounce, while others — such as the podiatrists who shared stories of how RPM and RTM have benefitted their patients and practices — provided us with fresh perspectives we don't typically have access to.

I also greatly appreciated the arguments made about not curtailing coverage while outcome data is currently being gathered in earnest. Between the short time the codes have been out, the yearly changes to the CPT requirements, and the huge, confounding variable that was the COVID-19 pandemic, it is difficult to argue that we already have the outcome insight to make sweeping changes — particularly for conditions and disease states where we have strong anecdotal evidence but where research is just getting started.

We will have more to say about the topics covered in this meeting and the future of RPM and RTM down the road. You can look for this commentary or links to it on social media (LinkedInTwitter, and Facebook). We'll also be sharing links to the recording and transcript of the MAC meeting when they're made available, hopefully in the coming days.

If the topics covered in the MAC meeting interest you, I invite you to connect with me personally on LinkedIn. I am always looking to expand my network of others in this space.

All Posts

Related Posts

Webinar: Remote Patient Monitoring Success in Independent Practice

Registration is open for the Prevounce webinar, "Building a Successful Remote Patient Monitoring Program in Independent Practice." The 45-minute program is scheduled for Tuesday, October 17, at 2:00 PM EDT.

Osteoarthritis & Rheumatoid Arthritis: Role of Remote Care Management

Arthritis is probably one of the most bothersome and frustrating health issues patients face. Classified as both degenerative and chronic, arthritis not only produces pain, but it can also increase symptoms of anxiety and depression, impact independence, contribute to sleep problems, and lead to a host of other chronic health issues due to neglectful self-management of the disorder. Fortunately, patients with the two most common types of arthritis — osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis — are eligible for participation in both chronic care management (CCM) and remote patient monitoring (RPM) services.

CMS's Proposed Services for Health-Related Social Needs: What to Know

The 2024 physician fee schedule (PFS) proposed rule from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) had a number of noteworthy proposals. Among them: three potential new care management services intended to help patients, including those with unmet social determinants of health (SDOH) needs and cancer, better navigate and overcome barriers to receiving services and support. These services, which CMS indicated it would pay for separately, are community health integration (CHI), principal illness navigation (PIN), and social determinants of health risk assessments.