.jpg)
Remote care management is changing quickly, and keeping pace requires expert clinical direction. The Prevounce Physician Advisory Board exists to ground our work in real clinical experience. Each quarter, I convene with Pranjal Gupta, MD and Tony Wang, MD, to examine what is shifting in the field and what it means for the providers and patients Prevounce serves. In our most recent session, we covered a range of topics that are directly shaping how remote patient monitoring (RPM) fits into modern care delivery. What follows are the key takeaways from our latest conversation.
CMS’s New Ambulatory Specialty Model (ASM) Signals a Shift Towards Longitudinal, Accountable Care
One of the most consequential developments we discussed was CMS's new Ambulatory Specialty Model (ASM), a mandatory payment model that will hold selected specialists financially accountable for the longitudinal management of chronic conditions — beginning with congestive heart failure and low back pain. For cardiologists practicing in designated geographic regions, this is not an optional program. Participation is determined retrospectively through Medicare claims data, meaning many practices have found themselves included based on their existing patient population rather than any active enrollment decision.
For those of us who work at the intersection of technology and clinical care, this shift is both validating and instructive. RPM was built for exactly this kind of model — one where continuous engagement, proactive intervention, and data-driven decision-making are core expectations. As the ASM continues to roll out, practices that invest in longitudinal monitoring infrastructure will be far better positioned to succeed under its frameworks than those relying solely on episodic in-office care.
The Role of RPM in Value-Based Care and Meeting Quality Measures
A natural extension of our ASM discussion was how RPM fits into the broader value-based care ecosystem, particularly as it relates to quality measures. Quality measure performance is increasingly tied to reimbursement under value-based arrangements, and RPM offers a uniquely powerful mechanism for improving those metrics across a range of chronic conditions.
Take heart failure as an example. Blood pressure control is specifically cited as a quality measure under ASM, and weight monitoring is critical for detecting fluid retention before it escalates to a hospitalization. When patients are monitored between visits, care teams gain a more complete, real-world picture of disease stability. The continuous data stream allows for earlier intervention, fewer preventable admissions, and more reliable documentation of the clinical indicators that drive performance scores. For practices in value-based care arrangements, the case for RPM goes well beyond clinical benefit. It becomes a foundational component of how performance is measured and how financial outcomes are shaped over time.
New RPM Billing Codes Better Reflect the Realities of Clinical Practice
One of the more operationally significant developments we explored was the evolution of RPM billing codes and how the 2026 Physician Fee Schedule updates have brought reimbursement structures into closer alignment with actual clinical need. For some time, the billing framework for RPM did not fully account for the variability in patient complexity, the level of clinical attention required, or the range of conditions being monitored.
CPT 99445 covers the supply of a remote monitoring device with 2-15 days of data transmission of physiological monitoring over a 30-day period. CPT 99470 covers the first 10-19 minutes of treatment services in a calendar month, requiring at least one real-time interactive communication with the patient or caregiver. Together, these new RPM CPT billing codes reflect a more nuanced understanding of how remote monitoring actually works in practice.
Applications for RPM Are Expanding Across Specialties
Perhaps one of the most exciting themes of our discussion was the expanding footprint of RPM across specialty medicine. Remote patient monitoring was largely associated with primary care and internal medicine for many years, predominantly used for managing hypertension and diabetes in high-risk populations. That picture has changed considerably, and it is something Drs. Wang and Gupta are seeing firsthand in their own practices. I have seen the same in cardiology. This expansion reflects growing clinician confidence in the technology, the data, and the workflows that support remote monitoring at scale
Wearable Devices Are Becoming More Common but Possess Clear Limitations
Wearable technology is expanding rapidly across healthcare, from continuous glucose monitors to arrhythmia detection, and the volume of alerts these devices generate for providers is significant. A meaningful portion of those alerts are false positives, and acting on inaccurate data in either direction carries real consequences. A false positive can trigger an unnecessary and costly workup. A false negative is harder to detect and harder to study, and the downstream risk to the patient can be severe.
Dr. Wang, Dr. Gupta, and I all share a common perspective here: more data does not automatically translate to better outcomes. The quality of that data matters enormously. The industry needs to continue investing in device accuracy and in studies that rigorously compare wearable performance against established RPM devices. Until that bar is raised consistently across devices, clinicians should engage with wearable data thoughtfully and maintain a clear distinction between consumer-grade technology and clinically validated RPM tools.
Final Thoughts From the Physician Advisory Board: Remote Care is Maturing, Clinicians Must Adapt
Across each of these topics, a clear pattern emerged: remote care management has moved well beyond early adoption into a phase of maturity. ASM introduces financial stakes tied to longitudinal performance. New RPM billing codes reward clinical effort more precisely. RPM is taking hold across specialties. And the data coming from devices needs to meet a higher bar before it can reliably inform clinical decisions. Practices that build sound monitoring programs now will be better prepared as these expectations continue to develop. Our Physician Advisory Board meets quarterly to ensure that guidance stays grounded in what clinicians are actually experiencing, and we look forward to continuing that work.
If you're at a stage where you're looking to learn more about remote care, we recommend reaching out to the experts at Prevounce to start a conversation.