In the quest to reduce hospitalizations, enhance patient satisfaction, and better manage costs, home health owners and operators are increasingly recognizing the value of a virtual care strategy. Key to this approach are two transformative tools: Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) and proactive clinician-led telephonic engagements, now referred to as Patient Relationship Management (PRM).

Both tools aim to enhance patient engagement and provide healthcare providers with critical insights between visits, helping them tackle complex challenges more effectively. The primary distinction in the home health space lies in the infrastructure and logistics required to operate a successful internal RPM program versus clinician-led telephonic engagements.

Before exploring further, let’s define RPM and PRM. We don’t aim to criticize RPM; as a technology vendor, we have supported over 150 providers in establishing successful programs with both RPM and PRM solutions. It’s important to recognize that this article primarily addresses the opportunities and challenges for home health providers serving patients without specific reimbursement methods, such as those under Medicare and Medicare Advantage.

  

Definitions

 

Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)

• According to CMS, RPM involves using digital technologies to collect health data from individuals in one location and electronically transmit it to healthcare providers in another location. This data can include vital signs, weight, blood pressure, blood sugar levels, pacemaker information, and more.

Patient Relationship Management (PRM)

• This approach includes audio-only visits that utilize technology specifically designed for the unique demands of home health care. PRM assists care teams in gathering updates on patient perceptions, providing standard care information based on identified challenges, and capturing other valuable data that enables agencies to proactively address daily challenges. This includes coordinating upcoming visits, monitoring falls, ensuring medication adherence, and managing symptoms like shortness of breath.

 

Key Comparisons

 

Cost of Scalability

• RPM: Traditional solutions often depend on physical equipment and internal staff for implementation and monitoring, which can be costly and limit scalability.
• PRM: In contrast, PRM leverages innovative technology solutions combined with outsourced clinicians to engage patients, facilitating scalable and cost-effective expansion for home health agencies.

Equipment Logistics and Setup

• RPM: Implementation challenges include the logistical and educational requirements for clinical teams, sometimes necessitating onsite visits for equipment setup.
• PRM: A PRM program simplifies this by using proactive clinician-led virtual engagements, reducing the need for physical equipment and extensive patient education on technology use.

Staff Technical Support

• RPM: Technical issues can frustrate patients and overwhelm home health staff who might lack the time or expertise to provide effective support.
• PRM: PRM eliminates the need for physical equipment, simplifying technical support and enhancing patient satisfaction through reliable virtual interactions.

Success with Specific Patient Populations

• RPM: Has shown remarkable success with specific groups, such as those with CHF or COPD, through targeted monitoring.
• PRM: Offers a comprehensive solution that caters to a broader range of patients, potentially increasing the overall quality of care and identifying early intervention opportunities across diverse patient groups.

As the demand for virtual patient engagement grows, both RPM and PRM present valuable solutions. While RPM offers precise monitoring for specific patient populations, it faces challenges related to installation, education, and costs.

PRM stands out by offering a streamlined, scalable process capable of engaging most patients, reducing the need for in-person installations, and lowering costs related to equipment and staffing.

Ultimately, the choice between RPM and PRM will should depend on the specific goals and budget constraints of each home health agency as both would be highly recommended if financially feasible for your agency.