Why Remote Patient Monitoring for Cardiovascular Disease?
Cardiovascular disease is affecting 121.5 million adults in the United States, making them the leading cause of death in the country. Through remote cardiac monitoring, treating these disorders has brought positive results. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) highlight the reasons behind the augmenting demand for remote patient monitoring in cardiology. According to research the use of remote patient monitoring devices has decreased blood pressure, detected cardiac arrhythmia earlier, and helped in HP (hypertension) decomposition, all of this reduce the risk of chronic cardiovascular disorders. Implementing RPM for patients with CVD or as a preventative step prior to a CVD diagnosis can help patients live healthier and longer lives, reducing both hospitalizations and mortality.
Let us dig deeper into how Remote Patient Monitoring is beneficial for Cardiovascular Disease:
Remote Patient Monitoring benefits more in the reduction of blood pressure than seen in self-monitoring reported by the American Heart Association. There has been a positive response in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure while using RPM, and it has been beneficial because of regular communication between the patient and a healthcare professional. In a research published in Clinical Cardiology, 91% of patients who followed a weekly blood pressure monitoring regimen achieved a target blood pressure of less than 135/85 mmHg after an average of seven weeks on the program.
RPM can be used as a prophylactic strategy to assist protect a patient’s condition from progressing to hypertension, in addition to being a crucial way for following patients identified with hypertension. RPM’s ease of use and comfort have also made it a useful tool for monitoring gestational hypertension.
Remote Patient Monitoring also comprises portable and implantable devices, expanding the variety of physiological data points for cardiovascular disease. Implantable electronic RPM devices have been demonstrated in recent studies to reduce cardiac hospitalizations by 19% and cardiology-related emergency department visits by 28%. When compared to patients who did not use remote patient monitoring devices, such gadgets cut total hospital stay length by 51%.
Other studies that focused on a single type of RPM device discovered positive results from implanted devices for monitoring HF patients. CardioMEMSTM research found that utilizing the PAP monitor reduced HF-related hospitalizations by 57% and overall hospitalizations by 27%. The CIED-based HeartLogicTM index, which can alert a healthcare practitioner ahead of an HF episode, was also found to be capable of predicting HF decompensation.
RPM with implanted cardioverter defibrillators reduced both death and 3-year all-cause rehospitalization rates in one retrospective study of over 37,000 patients. According to statistics, more than 6.1 million people in the United States have atrial fibrillation, and this number is not anticipated to decrease anytime soon.
Similarly, a study of almost 270,000 patients with a variety of implanted RPM devices discovered advantages for patients regardless of device type. Pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, or cardiac resynchronization therapy with pacing or defibrillation capability were used by participants in the study. Overall, those who had an implanted RPM device had lower all-cause mortality than those who did not, and spending more time using the remote monitoring corresponded with a higher chance of survival.
Aside from the benefits of RPM for individual patient health, the fact that RPM reduces hospital admissions and length of stay for cardiac events suggests that RPM can minimize the economic burden of these diseases. Heart disease and stroke account for $214 billion in healthcare costs in the United States each year, as well as a $138 billion loss in productivity. RPM is a crucial instrument for lowering these expenses to the healthcare system and the overall economy.
Read Next Blog: