Remote Patient Monitoring Works: The Data That Proves It

Amidst the debate on Remote Patient Monitoring's integrity and billing, one question may get lost: does remote patient monitoring improve clinical care?

The answer, drawn from real-world programs, is yes.

This clinical evidence review consolidates the findings of three program evaluations, at three different care delivery organizations.

A nine-site Federally Qualified Health Center network measured hypertension. One of the nation's largest integrated health systems measured diabetes. A regional cardiology service measured heart failure.

Despite the differences in setting, the evaluations came to the same conclusion: when patients transmit physiologic data from home and care teams act on it, disease control improves and clinicians make faster, better-informed decisions.

In this report, we explore:

• How an RPM-enabled hypertension program lifted controlled blood pressure from a 46 percent baseline to 55.3 percent by mid-year
• How remote glucose monitoring cut average HbA1c by nearly a full point within roughly two months of enrollment across 6,463 members
• How two-thirds of monitored heart failure patients with follow-up data recovered ejection fraction, and 87 percent reached guideline-directed therapy fully or as tolerated
• What providers and patients themselves reported about the value of monitoring, and where the evidence has honest limitations

Download the evidence review to see what remote patient monitoring achieved in three real health systems, and how to help protect Medicare beneficiaries' access to it.