Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Report    Zoom in charts

Preferences

Add Bookmark   Bookmark

Related Series

Remote Patient Monitoring 2022
|
2022
Remote Patient Monitoring 2019
|
2019
Remote Patient Monitoring 2018
|
2018

Related Segments

 End chart zoom
Remote Patient Monitoring 2023 Remote Patient Monitoring 2023
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

Remote Patient Monitoring 2023
Healthcare Organizations Test Solutions in Rapidly Evolving Market

author - Schafer Jackson
Author
Schafer Jackson
author - Ciera Walker
Author
Ciera Walker
 
May 30, 2023 | Read Time: 6  minutes

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has demonstrated promising outcomes—including earlier intervention and reduced utilization, outcomes that are critical in value-based care arrangements. The options for RPM are rapidly evolving, with many factors for healthcare organizations to consider. Reimbursement is an ongoing question, with some healthcare organizations feeling they can’t rely solely on reimbursement from CPT codes. Integration—with both the EMR and monitoring devices—is also vitally important to maintaining an RPM program’s viability. Additionally, RPM can require additional staff, though many vendors offer services to help alleviate this burden. Given all the factors at play, some healthcare organizations are starting with small pilots, testing to see which technology works. This report explores the customer experience with RPM technology in several key areas, including partnership, innovation, ease of use, and integration.

† See KLAS’ 2022 RPM report for more details on the outcomes organizations are achieving and how they financially support their RPM programs.

rpm iconDefining RPM

While there is some debate as to what constitutes remote patient monitoring, KLAS defines RPM technology as solutions that acquire, store, or transmit patient health data, most often outside of a conventional care setting. This usually entails patients using devices at home to monitor a chronic condition and send data to their provider (see page 3 for details on the types of organizations adopting RPM and the conditions being monitored). Though this data is typically captured episodically, there is growing interest in continuous monitoring as well as hospital-at-home technologies.

Health Recovery Solutions Offers Strong Partnership; Some Customers Question Their Pace of Innovation

delivery of new technology vs proactive serviceCustomers of multiyear Best in KLAS winner Health Recovery Solutions (HRS) are often large organizations with enterprise-wide programs that cover multiple conditions and care settings. HRS delivers solid partnerships, and customers feel the vendor is invested in their success. Some feel EMR integration is a strength, though several customers would like deeper or more automatic integration of patient data into the EMR. While customers express high loyalty, some feel HRS’ innovation hasn’t kept pace with the market or that growth has prevented HRS from keeping development promises. Things customers would like to see include continuous monitoring, better inventory management, an improved video visit tool, and an updated UI for tablets. Both Biofourmis and Current Health offer continuous monitoring capabilities, which are seen by many healthcare organizations as the next advancement in RPM. Interviewed customers of Biofourmis (limited data) vary in size and typically use the vendor’s technology to monitor a broad range of conditions. They view the vendor as innovative and a strong partner; feedback on the solution’s integration and ease of use is mixed. Current Health (limited data) was acquired by electronics retailer Best Buy in late 2021; interviewed customers are mostly large organizations. They describe the vendor as collaborative, responsive, and eager to create enhancements that meet customer needs, even if that development is sometimes slow.

MD Revolution Customer Experience Highly Dependent on Account Management Quality

All interviewed MD Revolution customers, most of whom are clinics using the solution to monitor hypertension and/or heart disease patients, also utilize the vendor’s care management services. Satisfaction with the vendor varies widely depending on the customer’s experience with their account manager. Satisfied customers report having engaged contacts who generate positive financial outcomes by enabling the organizations to monitor a higher volume of patients. However, many customers report struggling with account managers who don’t communicate proactively, resolve concerns, or help establish appropriate care management protocols and expectations. Some customers also feel development has been slow or report issues with EMR integration. Interviewed VitalTech customers (limited data) use the vendor to monitor a variety of conditions. More than half plan to replace the solution, citing unreliable support, a lack of proactive account management, or the solution’s lack of more advanced functionality.

would you buy again and part of long-term plans

TimeDoc Health and Optimize Health Stand Out for Ease of Use

TimeDoc Health and Optimize Health are both noted for offering good ease of use, an important benefit given that RPM efforts are often targeted at Medicare patients, who may be less familiar with technology than other patient populations. Interviewed TimeDoc and Optimize Health customers, most of whom are clinics, most often use their solution to monitor patients with hypertension, and many leverage the vendors’ patient-facing technical support, care management, and inventory/device services. TimeDoc customers highlight the vendor’s helpful personnel. Feedback regarding integration and reporting is varied—several customers say EMR integration isn’t available or isn’t as deep as they would like it to be. Optimize Health customers, who tend to purchase devices up front, say support resources are responsive when contacted. However, the vendor isn’t as proactive in their relationships as customers would like, and some customers have had issues with devices breaking or not working. CareSimple (limited data) is also highlighted for strong ease of use. Interviewed customers—who comprise a mix of clinics and health systems—most often use the vendor to monitor heart disease and hypertension, and they say CareSimple offers good support and relationships.

ease of use and integration

A Note about Livongo

Acquired by Teladoc Health in 2020, Livongo is used mostly by employer and payer organizations, who offer the chronic care management solution to employees or members. Customers speak positively about the solution’s ability to assist employees with diabetes care and note that the vendor offers free test strips so employees can test often. Customer relationships have historically been good, though in the last few years following the acquisition, some customers have seen a dip in service.

A Note about CareSignal, a Lightbeam Company

Unique to this market segment, CareSignal offers deviceless RPM, in which patients provide updates on their condition via calls or text. Though it cannot be reimbursed using RPM CPT codes, such an approach appeals to healthcare organizations looking to minimize technology concerns for patients. Interviewed customers—a mix of clinics and larger organizations—most commonly use the solution to monitor diabetes, and they tend to be highly satisfied, describing the vendor as extremely responsive and accommodating. Clinics tend to be the most satisfied given their greater need for the staff augmentation CareSignal provides. Given the uniqueness of their offering, CareSignal is excluded from all charts in this report except the “at a glance” chart below.

vendors at a glance

About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted over the last 12 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

customer experience pillars software

To supplement the customer satisfaction data gathered with the standard evaluation, KLAS also created supplemental questions to delve deeper into several questions specific to the remote patient monitoring market. These questions were

  • What conditions do you monitor with your RPM solution?
  • Do you use your RPM vendor for any of the following: patient-facing technical support, care management services, inventory/device management, or revenue cycle services?


Sample Sizes

sample sizesUnless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. Ratings from these individuals are aggregated in order to prevent any one organization’s feedback from disproportionately impacting a solution’s score. The table below shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.

Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 15, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 6, no score is shown. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.

author - Elizabeth Pew
Writer
Elizabeth Pew
author - Breanne Hunter
Designer
Breanne Hunter
author - Andrew Wright
Project Manager
Andrew Wright
 Download Report

This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2025 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.

Related Segments