Cost efficiency and reimbursement of remote monitoring: a US perspective

Demographic and technological changes are driving increased utilizationof cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) remotemonitoring. In theUSA, fee-for-servicemodel of healthcare delivery, services rendered are valued based upon time, intensity, and technical or practice expense costs. As a consequence of this perspective, and to contain spending, Medicare has grouped physician services into families. Spendingwithin each family of services must, by law, remain budget neutral. Cardiac implantable electronic devices monitoring services, remote and in-person, are grouped into one family. As the volume of services within this family increases, the individual encounters are destined to be discounted into ever decreasing portions. However, if the value of remote monitoring is demonstrated to extend beyond the previous boundaries of in-person interrogations, a rational request can be made to reconsider the relative value of remote monitoring. Outcome data supporting the value-added benefits of remote monitoring are rapidly accumulating, including (i) patient convenience, with reduced use of office services, (ii) equal safety compared with in-person evaluation, (iii) shorter detection time to actionable events (arrhythmias, cardiovascular disease progres-sion, and device malfunction), (iv) reduced length of stay for hospitalizations, (v) reduced inappropriate shocks, (vi) increased battery longevity, and (vii) a relative reduction in the risk of death. Fully automatic wireless technology, only recently widely implemented, will add considerable clinical efficiencies and further increase the value of remote monitoring. The U.S. challenge will be to appropriately define the relative value o