Skip to main content
Female clinician studying with laptop and books

Continuing Education in Healthcare: 5 Benefits of Online Learning

5 Benefits of Online Learning: Continuing education is an essential part of personal and professional development, especially for healthcare professionals. It helps them to stay updated about the latest happenings, trends, and technologies. Online training and education is one of the most effective ways of continuing education. Some state or employer licensing boards also require you to take certain courses or certifications relevant to your practice. Furthermore, it helps in advancing your career. Within the cardiac device space, the International Board of Heart Rhythm Examiners or IBHRE® conducts examinations for certifications such as CDRMS (Certified Cardiac Remote Monitoring Specialist), CCDS (Certified Cardiac Device Specialist) and CEPS (Certified Electrophysiology Specialist).

For individuals looking to break into the space or for healthcare professionals working in Cardiac Rhythm Management (CRM), Electrophysiology (EP) and Interventional Cardiology (IC)/Structural Heart (SH) who are looking to advance their careers, the PrepMD Accelerator is a trusted online learning resource. IBHRE® Practice Test Kits are also available for those studying for their certification exams.

Five Benefits of Online Learning for Healthcare Professionals:

  1. Accessible Anytime, Anywhere
    Since health care professionals have a busy schedule, it is hard to take time off to take extra courses or training which fits their routine. Through online training, you can study and learn whenever you get free time at work, home or even during commute. You can access the training and learning material on your smartphone, tablet or laptop whichever is feasible for you.
  2. More Interactive
    Online training offers enhanced chances of learning as it provides the learners with abundance of great learning features. Through online training you can take advantage of discussion boards, worksheets, written material, audios and videos.
  3. Less Costly as Compared to Traditional Classroom Learning
    While traditional learning has its own benefits, depending on which stage the you are in your career, it can get rather expensive since you have to pay for the trainer, learning materials, location, not to mention the added expense of transportation. With online training and learning, the cost is less, there are no transportation expenses, and the material is directly emailed to you. Your professional life doesn’t get affected as you can get online training in your spare time. Overall, it actually enhances the quality of service you offer your patients.
  4. High Quality Resource Database
    With online training, you would be provided with a database loaded with high quality resources to help you learn. The database is easily accessible, and you can find whatever information you need to enhance your learning process.
  5. Caters to Different Learning Styles
    Some learn best through listening, some through reading and others through visual interactions. Online training offers all. You have access to written material which you can print, audio lectures, visual presentations and so much more. It enables you to learn at your pace without rushing you on.

The best online learning solutions should include opportunities for customization, online, onsite and hybrid learning formats, as well as needs and proficiency assessments.

The Life Cycle of a Cardiac Device Clinic

A typical cardiac device clinic experiences common same challenges over and over again. The life-cycle of an efficiently run and optimized device clinic contains several universal components. These same problem areas exist in device clinics everywhere and include these primary challenges: staffing, training and remote monitoring optimization and efficiencies.

A Device Clinic Staffing Crisis: Device clinics nationwide are grappling with a staffing crisis as they strive to meet remote monitoring care standards. Recruiting and retaining skilled device techs and nurses is an uphill battle. According to recent HRS guidelines, clinics need 3 device techs for every 1000 CIED patients they manage – a daunting yet critical task.

The Cycle of the Cardiac Device Clinic: Staffing and training challengesCardiac Device Clinic Needs to Hire and Train Staff: The Device Clinic Manager feels as if the recruiting,hiring and training process is never complete. Finding staff that is trained and clinically ready to handle remote monitoring and in-clinic patient care is a tall order. Even after hiring competent clinic staff a Device Clinic Manager may have additional clinic staff in need of training.

Device Remote Monitoring Needs Efficiency and Optimization: The workflow in a device clinic can be overwhelming, so a Clinic Manager is constantly searching for ways to optimize and improve efficiency in the clinic’s remote monitoring with the goal to have a fully efficient device clinic that will elevate the patient outcomes.

PrepMD is the only provider offering a complete solution to cardiac device clinics:

Cardiac Device Remote Monitoring Service

Remote Monitoring Service

Choose PrepMD’s trusted gold-standard cardiac device remote monitoring service, delivered by a full-time IBHRE®-certified team

Cardiac Device Remote Monitoring Software

Remote Monitoring Software
Manage your clinic with our highly intuitive and clinician-developed software, offering SaaS, managed-SaaS and hybrid options.

Cardiac In-Clinic Staffing

In-Clinic Staffing

Meet your ever-growing cardiac clinic staffing needs using PrepMD’s hire, train, deploy, and develop model for in-clinic solution.

Cardiac Healthcare Training

Healthcare Training

Advance the clinical skills of your team with PrepMD’s customizable online, onsite, and hybrid healthcare training solutions.

AI in Cardiology, technology and healthcare

AI in Cardiology: A Tool, Not a Replacement

In the dynamic landscape of healthcare, Artificial Intelligence (AI) is emerging as a potential ally. For stakeholders in hospitals and clinics grappling with large volumes of data, AI presents an opportunity to enhance efficiency. This is particularly relevant in cardiology, where AI can assist in areas such as Electrophysiology and rhythm analysis.

AI and Cardiology: An Adjunct, Not a Substitute

AI’s role in cardiology is not to replace human expertise but to augment it, especially in the realm of implantable devices like Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators (ICDs), Pacemakers, and Implantable Loop Recorders (ILRs). These devices generate a wealth of data that can be overwhelming. AI can help manage this data, identifying patterns and anomalies that might be overlooked due to the sheer volume of information.

One of the key applications of AI in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIED) practice is reducing false positives. By doing so, AI can help manage data overload without missing genuine positive findings. This can make the process of rhythm analysis more efficient, but it does not eliminate the need for expert human analysis.

LLM, ML, and DL: The AI Trio

Understanding how AI works in this context requires differentiating between Large Language Models (LLM), Machine Learning (ML), and Deep Learning (DL).

LLMs are AI models trained on a vast amount of text data. They can generate human-like text based on the input they receive. In cardiology, LLMs could be used to interpret patient data and generate reports, but these would still need to be reviewed and validated by healthcare professionals. LLMs are particularly useful in processing and understanding natural language, making them ideal for tasks such as reading patient histories or interpreting doctor’s notes.

ML is a subset of AI that uses statistical methods to enable machines to improve with experience. In cardiology, ML could be used to predict patient outcomes based on historical data, but these predictions would need to be evaluated in the context of each individual patient by a healthcare professional. ML algorithms can learn from data and make predictions or decisions without being explicitly programmed to perform the task. This makes them useful for tasks such as identifying patterns in heart rhythms or predicting the likelihood of a cardiac event based on patient data.

DL is a subset of ML that uses neural networks with many layers. DL can be used in cardiology to analyze complex data from imaging or ECGs, for example, but the interpretation and final decision-making should still lie with healthcare professionals. DL models are capable of learning from unstructured data and can identify complex patterns, making them ideal for tasks such as interpreting cardiac imaging data or detecting anomalies in ECG readings.

The Future of AI in Cardiology: A Balanced View

While AI holds promise for the future of cardiology, it’s crucial to remember that it’s a tool, not a replacement for human expertise. The development of AI is ongoing, and while it can assist in data analysis and decision-making, it cannot replace the need for human validation. The best patient outcomes are achieved when AI is used as a tool to assist healthcare professionals, not replace them.

In conclusion, AI can be a valuable asset in cardiology, but it’s not a magic bullet. As we explore this exciting frontier, it’s essential to remember the irreplaceable value of human expertise and validation. AI can be a powerful tool in our arsenal, but like all tools, it must be used wisely and responsibly, always in conjunction with human insight.

It’s important to partner with a company like PrepMD that not only delivers experts in the field of rhythm analysis, but also is actively building a software platform with strategic consideration and a focus on better patient outcomes.

Medical Technology hands on keyboard

Cardiac Device Remote Monitoring: A Great Marriage of Technology and Patient Care

At the ’22 Boston Heart Rhythm Society meeting, Fran Moriarty (PrepMD Director of National Accounts) sat down for Podcast conversation to discuss the cardiac device remote monitoring career space.

Beth Davenport is the Clinical Director and Amy Tucker is the Advanced Cardiac Device Nurse for Sanger Heart and Vascular Institute cardiac rhythm device clinic and remote monitoring center.

What Makes Cardiac Remote Monitoring a Great Career Choice?
Beth and Amy were eager to share stories about their careers and explain what they find rewarding about their jobs every day. It seemed to boil down to embracing technology, working alongside smart people with the goal of providing the best patient care.

“Our clinicians make a difference in people’s lives every single day, whether it’s their heart failure management or they have onset AFib, we’re identifying it, we’re getting them to the physician before they have a stroke.”
-Beth on the critical importance of having a highly trained, clinically competent staff

How are Cardiology Clinics Managing the Rapid Growth in Device Remote Monitoring?
Sanger Heart tells the universal story of cardiology clinics across the U.S. of the rapid growth in remote monitoring as the Standard of Care. Back in 2005 the Sanger cardiac patient population was only about 3,500 patients with only 525 billable remotes for the entire year. Fast forward to 2020 where billable remote monitoring took place for all 12,000 patients and nearly 32,000 billable remotes.

Today, Sanger has about 20 clinicians, including cardiac device nurses, cardiac device specialists, and outreach access specialists. Successful growth at Sanger was positively impacted by the addition of the Outreach Specialist. The Outreach Specialist helps troubleshoot communication and administrative responsibilities, freeing up the clinical staff for patient care.

“It just grew so rapidly, and we found out how many lives we were saving by early detection and of potential problems,”
-Amy on the tremendous growth of remote monitoring

Identifying Staffing Needs in a Cardiology Clinic
At Sanger, they attribute hard-work, thorough analysis, and supportive leadership as the building blocks to how they grew their clinic to what it is today. Two different Lean Sigma studies were employed to identify ways to make improvements in the clinic’s workflow process. This analysis allowed for the creation of an accurate staffing model. They were able to identify the amount of work each clinician and outreach specialist can accomplish in a day and the time it takes to care for a group of patients.

“That proof of concept is really helpful when you’re talking to administrators and explaining why you need more staff.  What we’re doing is revenue generating, so I think one of the important things for administrators to remember is that device management is most importantly about keeping patients safe.”
-Beth on the results of the staffing studies

COVID-19 helped to force some positive changes
COVID-19 has certainly presented a challenge for healthcare across the board. In this conversation, Beth and Amy explained how COVID served as the prevailing force for change to embrace technology and employ change for the greater good at Sanger. At the onset of COVID their clinic went from about 55% of patient encounters through remote monitoring to 98% in a matter of only a few months. Prior to COVID they had been operating under assumptions that their typical aged patients would likely resist the technology.

“We were wrong. They became very thankful that we could keep an eye on their device without them coming into the office.”
-Beth on their patients’ willingness do virtual visits

The Challenges of Training and Retaining Clinically Competent Staff
Not surprisingly, in a field as complex as cardiac, you’ll find many challenges in terms of recruiting and training a clinically competent staff. Remote monitoring data is connected to a patient and the alerts can be life threatening, with Beth and Amy each telling stories about 911 calls. At Sanger they have a minimum 6-month orientation period for their employees. It takes years to become a true expert in this field, according to Beth.

“These are people that are looking at data that is connected to a patient to make sure that they’re safe …There are so many levels of critical thinking…You have to train people to understand accountability and they have to know all the devices.”
Beth on the importance of a highly trained staff

The patients coming in person into the clinic may be the most complicated cases with complex device reprogramming needed, but the patients who are at home require thoroughly trained specialists to determine if they also need to be seen in clinic. The remote monitoring specialist is assessing patient data for device leads, battery life, device advisories, software updates, and looking for conditions such as high-rate episodes, or onset atrial fib. Again, it’s a big responsibility, requiring a highly trained staff.

The Future of Cardiac Remote Monitoring
At Sanger, the clinicians take the time to educate patients on their own cardiac conditions. Encouraging patients to take more ownership of their own cardiac conditions should ultimately lead to improved understanding and outcomes. Beth and Amy agreed that increased patient engagement will be front and center for changes coming ahead in the cardiac device space, similar to the way diabetes patients are engaged on a daily basis with their own care. Personal wearable devices and other technologies will continue to expand and change the landscape by bringing more knowledge directly to the patient.

Careers in Cardiac
When the topic turned to choosing a career in cardiac devices, Beth and Amy both describe their own experiences in this career space as technically challenging and clinical rewarding, particularly so with remote patient care seeing so much change and growth right now.

Beth called it the “great marriage of technology and patient care,” with Amy adding, “We need to do a better job of talking about this specialty and getting the word out.”

Thanks to Sanger Health for an insightful interview to help spread the word about the rewarding career field of cardiac device patient remote monitoring. Not many people outside of healthcare know what a cardiac device specialist is or know about cardiac remote monitoring specialists. Young people and college students thinking about a career in healthcare typically know about the traditional roles and won’t necessarily hear about a device specialist at their college career center.

They might know about an ER nurse, but as Beth said, “You don’t see us on Grey’s anatomy.” 

Future of cardiac healthcare

Navigating the Future of Remote Monitoring Clinics – Insights from the 2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus

If you’re involved in a Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) clinic or you’re a stakeholder in the broader healthcare ecosystem, you’ve likely come across the “2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement on Practical Management of the Remote Device Clinic“. This important document offers insightful management strategies for remote device clinics, raising key challenges and valuable recommendations.

Digital Transformation: Handling Data in the New Era

The sheer volume of data generated by CIEDs demands a more streamlined approach to handling, reviewing, and presenting this data. The paper calls for universally accepted data element definitions and exchange formats. These would enable a more efficient data transfer process, thereby reducing time-consuming manual tasks. One solution can be integrating device data via a vendor agnostic device management software platform such as the one offered by PrepMD into the hospital information system, seeing it as an extension of a patient’s file.

The Power of Patient Education

Education is key. Informing patients about their devices and the remote monitoring process enhances their understanding and adherence to monitoring. This should ideally start before the device implantation, covering device function, alert management, and ongoing connectivity maintenance. To enhance patient education in remote monitoring, PrepMD suggests providing patients with informative written documentation or FAQs during their wound check appointment. This helps ensure that patients receive comprehensive information about the remote monitoring process.

Clinic-specific Policies and Third-party Resources

Clearly defined, clinic-specific policies provide structure and transparency. Patients should know the operational hours, remote scheduling, billing details, and the importance of maintaining connectivity and follow-up.

Third-party resources are increasingly becoming essential to meet care standards efficiently. But it’s crucial to be mindful of potential risks, including cybersecurity, data privacy, and financial implications. As a company offering comprehensive services for CIED device clinics, PrepMD ensures that its clinic solutions team are well-versed in device management. This expertise plays a crucial role in mitigating these risks effectively.

Embracing Technological Innovations

App-based software and vendor-neutral CIED management software can be game changers. They can help patients understand their device functions better, manage alerts, and save staff time needed for device checks, freeing up time for more patient-focused tasks. PrepMD RMS highly encourages the use of clinician-developed technologies that are user-friendly and tailored to meet the specific needs of clinics. These technologies are designed to simplify data management, avoiding unnecessary complications that can arise from underutilized features.

Outsourcing to Third-Party Resources: A Practical Solution

Outsourcing to third-party resources can alleviate administrative burdens, manage high-volume data, and improve communication between providers and patients. By collaborating with a specialized company like PrepMD RMS, clinics can not only deliver optimal patient care but also prioritize data privacy and maintain a positive patient perception. Such partnership ensures that all aspects of patient well-being are at the forefront of clinic operations.

Rethinking Staffing and Infrastructure for Remote Monitoring

The consensus statement emphasizes the importance of a dedicated, trained team to manage remote monitoring transmissions. A team-based organizational model is critical for handling the increasing workload. Staff-to-patient ratios should reflect this, and a minimum of 3.0 full-time equivalents per 1000 patients on RM is suggested, comprising both clinical and administrative staff. PrepMD RMS suggests that clinics explore the option of partnering with a renowned clinical solutions company to enhance their clinic’s staffing or provide industry-standard clinic training to their current staff. This collaborative effort guarantees the delivery of exceptional remote monitoring care to patients.

What Does This Mean for Your Clinic?

If you’re managing a remote monitoring clinic, consider implementing these practical recommendations:

1. Regular, individualized patient and caregiver education.

2. Appropriate staffing with clearly defined roles and responsibilities.

3. Ongoing training and certification of clinical staff.

4. Use of specific programming alerts and prompt response mechanisms.

5. Secure and confidential communication of RM device results.

6. A strong relationship with industry for staff training and patient services.

7. Utilizing qualified third-party resources for managing increased device clinic volume.

8. An emergency management plan for device problems.

9. Patient education on clinic-specific policies.

10. Timely response to high-priority alerts.

11. Incorporation of device reports into electronic health records.

The 2023 HRS/EHRA/APHRS/LAHRS Expert Consensus Statement lays out the road map for the future of remote monitoring clinics. It highlights the importance of a standardized organizational model, dedicated teams, and efficient third-party service providers.

With a partnership with a premier cardiac clinical solutions company such as PrepMD, your clinic can not only manage the increasing workload but also achieve optimal care for your patients. By focusing on patient education, streamlining data management, and leveraging modern technology, we can help navigate the complexities of this digital health era. At PrepMD, we understand the changing landscape of remote monitoring and offer customized training, contract staffing, cloud-based software and expert remote monitoring services designed to meet these evolving needs.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Remote Monitoring Clinics

As the CIED patient population grows and technology evolves, the challenge to maintain high-quality care is significant. However, the future looks promising. Incorporating the strategies from the expert consensus, such as outsourcing to third-party resources and ensuring robust patient education, can drive your clinic towards more efficient and patient-centered care.

In conclusion, the key to unlocking the potential of remote monitoring lies in embracing technology, prioritizing patient education, and leveraging third-party resources. These guidelines from the expert consensus pave the way for the successful navigation of remote device clinics. As a trusted third-party service provider, PrepMD is here to partner with your clinic to adapt and thrive in this rapidly evolving field.

Closeup of programming a cardiac device

Third-party system for CIED remote monitoring – Who needs it and How to choose one?

A third-party software system for CIED (Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device) devices refers to a software platform or application developed by a company other than the device manufacturer. It is designed to centralize and streamline the management and monitoring of patients with implanted cardiac devices.

The following entities may benefit from using a third-party system for CIED devices:

  1. Cardiac clinics: Clinics that implant and manage CIED devices for a large patient population across multiple device manufacturers can use a third-party system to consolidate data from different vendor websites into a single platform. This centralization simplifies the monitoring process and improves efficiency.
  2. Hospitals and healthcare systems: Institutions that have multiple clinics or departments managing CIED devices can benefit from a third-party system to standardize data management, integrate with their electronic health record (EHR) systems, and enhance interoperability across different facilities. The Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) Interoperability Working Group is currently working with industry to try to standardize these vendor sites.
  3. Outsourced monitoring services: Some small or growing practices may choose to outsource their remote monitoring services to third-party companies specializing in CIED device management. These companies utilize third-party software systems to efficiently handle the increasing patient population without the need for additional staffing.

When choosing a third-party system for CIED devices, several primary considerations should be taken into account:

  1. Integration capabilities: The system should be capable of integrating with different device manufacturers’ platforms and EHR systems. It should provide bidirectional data sharing between the third-party system and the EHR, allowing seamless transfer of patient reports and data.
  2. Usability and workflow efficiency: The software should offer a user-friendly interface and a logical, streamlined workflow tailored to the needs of clinicians managing CIED devices. It should minimize the time and effort required to navigate between different vendor websites and enable quick access to actionable alerts.
  3. Security and privacy: Data security is of paramount importance when dealing with patient information. The third-party system should have robust security measures in place, such as multifactor authentication and regular audits (e.g., SOC 2 Type II) to ensure patient data privacy and protection.
  4. Cloud-based infrastructure: A cloud-based system offers advantages such as scalability, accessibility from any location, and regular updates and innovations. It allows for real-time data transmission and enables the vendor to continuously improve the software based on customer feedback.
  5. Quality of service and support: The third-party system should be backed by a reputable company that provides high-quality customer service and technical support. This ensures that clinics have access to timely assistance when needed.
  6. Staff training and competency: The software should provide adequate training and resources to support staff in understanding and interpreting clinical data from CIED devices. This may include built-in training modules, anatomical models, and resources for ECG interpretation and rhythm analysis.
  7. Customization options: The system should allow clinics to customize certain aspects according to their preferences and workflows. This may include report templates, data presentation formats, and the ability to add or remove reviewers as needed.

Ultimately, the decision to adopt a third-party software system for CIED devices depends on factors such as the size of the clinic, the number of device manufacturers used, the need for centralized data management, and the clinic’s long-term growth plans. Consulting with experts in the field and evaluating different software options can help clinics make an informed choice.

If you need help with the many questions that arise when determining if and when to use a third-party software system for your cardiac device clinic, contact the PrepMD Clinic Solutions Team to learn more.

Team of clinicians at meeting

Determining Your Device Clinic’s Alert Management Protocols

Rob Lerman, MD, CMO and Kent Seckinger, CCDS, Customer Success Director, PrepMD Clinic Solutions Leadership Team


Management of clinical alerts is unquestionably one of the most challenging tasks for remote monitoring programs. Optimizing alerts saves staff time and focuses energy on clinically relevant issues. Customizing alerts addresses the variations in care that are seen between clinicians. Development of a clear clinical escalation policy ensures expedited communication between the care team and reduces the time between clinical event and clinical action.

Whenever a remote monitoring program is started or reviewed, it is helpful to bring all the clinical stakeholders together for a discussion about alert programming. That includes anyone from the physicians and advanced practice providers (APPs) who see escalations to the nurses and techs that may be the primary alert reviewers.  As difficult as it may be to get physicians and APPs to sit down for such a meeting, establishing their preferences up front saves a great deal of everyone’s time in the long run. It is important to go through all the manufacturers’ alerts with fresh eyes and select whether they are programmed on as a clinic default and if so to what level of urgency (red vs. yellow, etc.) If possible, it is helpful to create categories of patients based on indications and create standardized programming parameters for those patient groups. For example, patients with complete heart block should likely all have the alert for excess RV pacing turned off. A clinic may want to have one standard set of alerts programmed for primary prevention ICD patients and another for secondary prevention patients. While there will always be customization, if you can standardize the alerts as much as possible across your population, it will reduce confusion and make communication that much easier.

Patient-level customization should start at or even before implant with a conversation between the implanting physician and industry representative. Implanting physicians will often have a wealth of clinical information about the patient which will inform device programming, and device company representatives typically know the details of features and algorithms better than anyone else. An experienced device company representative will learn the programming preferences of the physicians and clinics they serve and will often quickly learn the typical alert preference programming. Nonetheless, the implanting physician should always confirm the proper programming for an individual patient, especially when it deviates from the customary.

The first clinic visit after implant is another great opportunity to check in with the clinicians on alert programming for an individual patient, especially if the follow-up staff is not the same as the implant staff. The lab or operating room is often a hectic environment and there isn’t always an opportunity for a thorough review of alert parameters at implant. The follow-up wound check may provide a better opportunity to raise questions such as whether a patient in atrial fibrillation will be a candidate for cardioversion and thus should have AF alerts programmed on or whether that patient is in permanent AF and should have those alerts turned off. Making the initial investments in time to program alerts properly pays dividends over the long term.

One issue that is often a source of variation in programming is whether to program alerts as “red” or “yellow” or other. Certainly, there are some alerts that are not programmable and default to red status for almost all manufacturers. Examples of those would be a battery at end of life or a hardware reset. Other alerts can be programmed as red or yellow, or for many Medtronic alerts, as a website only alert that will not be identified by color. For the most part, red or yellow alerts are displayed at the top of the dashboard on the manufacturers’ remote monitoring portals, so their main benefit is that they are readily identifiable as issues requiring attention. Many device nurses or techs will start their reviews by attending to the red or yellow alerts, so those designations may have a direct impact on clinical workflow. Some physicians or APPs will direct their clinical escalations based on alert color, such as “Only call me for red alerts”. Others may treat red and yellow alerts identically. While alert color is helpful, not all clinically actionable events may be identifiable by a red or yellow alert. Episodes of pace-terminated ventricular tachycardia or a single ICD shock may not always be eligible for red or yellow alert designation, depending on the manufacturer.

Many alerts offer opportunities to customize further based on parameters such as arrhythmia duration or heart rate. For example, a patient with known short bursts of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation could be programmed to alert only if an episode lasted for a prolonged period of time or if the AF burden met certain criteria. Likewise, a patient with permanent AF with controlled ventricular response could be programmed to alert only if the ventricular rate exceeded a certain value and a patient with known brief sinus pauses could be programmed to alert only for prolonged pauses. This contrasts with for example, a patient with a history of cryptogenic stroke for whom you may want to be alerted for any episode of AF that might identify the need for anti-coagulation. Customization of alerts in this manner goes a long way towards increasing the odds that an alert will be actionable. It is important that members of the care team who are adjusting alerts have access to important clinical information such as anti-coagulation status which may change over time.

Many implantable cardiovascular monitors, or implantable loop recorders (ILRs), are seeking to decrease the large burden of non-actionable alerts by offering indication specific programming as a “bundle”. For example, a patient with suspected ventricular tachycardia may have the “Tachy” parameter programmed on as a red alert but the “AF” parameter off altogether. Often clinics will program alerts broadly “On” at implant but aggressively narrow the alert parameters as time goes on.

Regardless of the best intent, some false positive alerts are inevitable. ILRs are probably the most common culprits because of the nature of the device. Given that they are not intracardiac but subcutaneous their signals are subject to more external disruption and noise than intracardiac leads. Additionally, since like surface leads they have combined atrial and ventricular electrograms, sophisticated algorithms to differentiate atrial from ventricular arrhythmias based on A-V relationships are often unavailable. Of course, even pacemakers and ICDs often have trouble differentiating atrial from ventricular tachycardia and may generate false positive alerts. Programming around these can be quite difficult. The programming of ILRs is often more “liberal” with respect to arrhythmia identification, because as diagnostic-only devices they cannot treat the arrhythmias that occur, raising the importance of identifying rhythm abnormalities (such as long pauses or tachyarrhythmias) so that they can be treated before adverse events occur. Some physicians are less interested in being alerted for events that the device has treated, such as a single ICD shock.

Minimizing false positive alerts decreases alert fatigue amongst clinicians, but even when this isn’t possible, the primary alert reviewer needs to remain vigilant and at least briefly review every alert. A true-life example where this played out was a woman in her mid-20s with an ILR who transmitted over 100 false positive alerts for sinus tachycardia before she had an episode of true ventricular tachycardia at over 200 bpm. Many ILRs now allow reprogramming remotely which would have allowed us to filter out the sinus tachycardia during her daily workouts, but even when that is unsuccessful it is important to review all data, even though it can be frustrating at times.

Different physicians may have very different attitudes about what kind of arrhythmias are important, especially when considering therapy such as catheter ablation. Whereas one cardiologist may not be interested in asymptomatic episodes of ventricular tachycardia below the rate cut-off of an ICD, others are more aggressive about ablation of complex arrhythmias and may want to be aware of those same arrhythmias. Similar philosophical differences apply to atrial arrhythmias, so again communication between physicians and the primary event reviewers is paramount. In organizations with multiple physicians, it is often helpful to have a physician champion for the remote monitoring program who can often drive at least some level of standardization of alert criteria.

The final, and in some ways, the most important piece of the alert management puzzle is development and operation of a coordinated cohesive clinical escalation policy. The escalation policy determines how clinical information gets turned into clinical action. Once the primary reviewer, be it a clinic nurse or tech or a third-party remote monitoring specialist, determines that an alert or event is real, what do they do with that information? What types of events should generate a report? What types of events require escalation to another member of the care team and how should that information be conveyed? Is a note in the EHR sufficient or does it warrant a phone call or text message? To which member of the care team does the message go? Does the physician ever want to be interrupted in clinic or in the lab and if so, for what? Are there specific clinical scenarios which merit that a patient should call 911 or go to the emergency department? Are there others when scheduling a clinic visit is more appropriate?

Clear delineation and documentation of the clinical escalation policy reduces stress for the care team and ensures that urgent situations get addressed quickly and that no one is interrupted with unnecessary calls or messages. Typical issues that might be addressed include episodes of atrial fibrillation- how long or fast do they need to be in order to be escalated? How is an anticoagulated patient handled differently from one who isn’t anticoagulated? How about episodes of nonsustained ventricular tachycardia in both ICD and pacemaker patients? How long does a pause in an ILR patient need to be to require urgent attention? Don’t forget to address both normal working hours as well as nights, weekends, and holidays when the entire team is not available. An upfront investment of a little time to define escalation policies improves patient care and goes a long way towards avoiding awkward and sometimes unpleasant conversations.  

Clinical escalations should always be documented, whether in the EHR, remote monitoring software platform, or elsewhere and the escalation protocols should be a living document that is periodically reviewed. Emerging clinical data, changes in clinician staff, or improvements in clinical operations are just a few of the reasons that protocols may need to be changed. At minimum, an annual stakeholder review improves the chances that everyone is staying on the same page.

Data deluge and alert fatigue are some of the principal barriers to adoption of remote monitoring for CIEDs. Careful attention to alert management can minimize false positive alerts and keep the focus on moving from clinical event to clinical action. Standardizing alert parameters as much as possible by device type and patient indication can simplify clinical workflows, but customization of alerts for individual patients further refines the data that needs review. Developing clear clinical escalation policies improves efficiency and patient care, while minimizing unnecessary distractions.

Questions about this article should be directed to the PrepMD Device Clinic Solutions Leadership Team.

Black clinician in hospital corridor

Cardiac Device Clinic Workflow Improvements: Recommendations from Experts in Remote Monitoring

It certainly is an understatement to say that running an effective and efficient cardiac device remote monitoring clinic is a challenge. Any clinic manager who is evaluating an existing remote monitoring program for improvements or who is launching a new remote monitoring program must dedicate time to analyze their clinic’s current staff, workflow, and capabilities against what is needed. This will help anticipate and stave off many of the most common challenges faced by device clinics – problems such as staff burn-out, unscheduled patients and incorrect billing. 

Every clinic has a unique workflow, complications, and issues when it comes to running a cardiac device remote monitoring program. Clinics receive tremendously large amounts of device transmission clinical data coming in daily. Many clinics do not realize the value of remote monitoring and operate without a dedicated remote monitoring staff. Clinic managers may underestimate the amount of hidden workflow involved in remote monitoring which causes many pain points for staff struggling through the heavy workflow. Many clinics struggle with the standardization of an alert protocol and alert criteria. There is certainly a prevalence and frequent misunderstanding of the value and requirements of remote monitoring which commonly leads to ineffectively managed remote monitoring programs.  

“Unfortunately, there is a lack of a unified approach to remote monitoring across the entire cardiac device remote monitoring space. This leads to confusion of what is needed to run a device remote monitoring program. There is an unfortunate tendency where this type of remote care can lead to a devaluing of the work being performed, simply because there is not a face-to-face patient interaction taking place, the value of the clinical care should not be minimized.” Jess Rizzo, CCDS, PrepMD Clinical Operations Director

Without an established Remote Monitoring Process in place, How are these questions answered each day?

“it’s important to remember that all of these device clinic remote monitoring tasks are essential, including the variable and hidden tasks that are difficult to quantify. In fact, not recognizing them can certainly lead to a loss of revenue, missed clinical needs, and that overburdening burnout feeling that many clinicians feel.” 

Clinical Workflow: Who, What and How?

In order for a remote monitoring program to run effectively and efficiently the following must be clearly delineated: the tasks (what), the who (which clinic staff is doing each task) and how (training needed, communication, and timeline/processes for all tasks) must be clearly delineated to ensure quality. 

Big Picture Questions to Analyze a Cardiac Device Remote Monitoring Program 

  • What: What are the required tasks for a best-in-class remote monitoring program? 
  • Who: Who on the clinic’s staff is best suited to handle each of these required tasks?  What training is required?
  • How: How will these individuals accomplish the required tasks? What is the overall process and what are each individual contributor’s roles and expectations? What quality measures need to be in place?

Beyond the big picture questions, there are many more questions and details that go into implementing and improving a device remote monitoring program. Each clinic handles things differently, so who is responsible for all the tasks of remote monitoring is extremely variable for each clinic. Efficient handling of remote monitoring is possible, but only with the proper staff and workflow. It is infinitely difficult to quantify all of the tasks of remote monitoring because the same task might take 30 minutes one day and three hours the next. A relevant time and workflow study published in JMIR Cardio 1, “Clinic Time Required for Remote and In-Person Management of Patients With Cardiac Devices: Time and Motion Workflow Evaluation” is a persuasive argument for the efficiencies of remote monitoring. However, this study certainly does NOT take into account all the intricacies and requirements regarding remote monitoring workflow, tasks, training and more.

  • Staffing: Who is/are the right individual(s) on the staff for each of the required tasks? Is it feasible for one  or two individuals or is a dedicated team required for certain tasks?
  • Monitoring of the device company websites: adding, deleting, or transferring patients clinic to clinic. It takes time to go through each of the manufacturer’s websites plus clinic sites.
  • Report Triage: So here is where you’re deciding basically the seriousness of each report. You’re checking to see if the alerts are actionable. You’re checking to see if that patient initiated is actionable. It can include alerts or concerns within the scheduled reports. This also includes making sure those actionable reports or alerts are brought to the proper clinical staff, whether that be to a PA or a physician. 
  • Report Construction: What are the tasks and process needed to complete even just one remote report? This includes everything from data download, clinical write-up, report sign-off, and billing. This also consists of which includes alerts and patient-initiated transmissions. This task will look very different depending on the clinic’s software. It is also important to remember that there is an element of triage here with many alerts found within scheduled transmissions. In these situations, the clinic staff needs to determine if they’re actionable or not actionable, brought to the proper staff, in addition the writing that scheduled report. The person writing the remote report must take patient history into consideration and make appropriate recommendations for clinical care. 
  • Charting/Documentation: The documentation includes moving that report in an organized and accurate manner into the electronic health record, ensuring proper documentation of the report and any follow-up actions needed. 
  • Patient Communication: Each clinic is unique regarding the type of communication done with the patient to inform them of the remote report and this can be done by mail, phone or through a patient portal. If there was something on the remote that is serious enough the patient may need to be seen in clinic. This requires a phone call to the patient to ask about any symptoms they’re having and make a determination to have the patient seen in clinic.
  • Billing: Attention to detail for accurate billing is a challenge. Is the coding/billing accurate, based on the type of report? Is it a scheduled transmission or is it an alert transmission? 
  • Scheduling Patient Follow Up: Is the next visit an in-office or a remote follow-up? This may be as simple as confirming that the schedule is correct on the websites or within the EHR. 
  • Final Documentation and Sign-Off: The next step is about documentation which includes ensuring the report is kept in  the proper place in patient records, as well as getting the final sign off with clinic staff. 
  • Patient Education: This includes initial and ongoing communication to ensure that the patient understands the value and functionality of remote monitoring. This includes instructions that clearly communicate the need for the patient to plug in and keep the monitor connected and explain how it transmits important clinical data as part of their overall care program.
  • Transmission Connectivity and Troubleshooting: This is the task of identifying who is not transmitting data and troubleshooting with those patients in order to help get them transmitting again. It is important to focus on not only getting patients reconnected, but ensuring they are properly connected and transmitting moving forward.
  • Quality: Who is responsible for checking up on quality metrics on report writing, patient communication, connectivity, billing, and how often are these quality checks performed?

Is a Dedicated Remote Monitoring Clinical Staff Required?

Some clinics are set up to have remote monitoring responsibilities assigned as fill-in-work when the clinic staff have availability during their downtime. This can lead to inefficiencies and cause a tremendous amount of confusion about billing practices, and a valuable loss in revenue. 

“We see some clinics with two different mindsets when it comes to remote monitoring: Full-time and dedicated staff versus staff handling on as time-allows basis. Having Clinic staff dedicated to remotes results in a far more efficient and effective remote monitoring program. The clinics without a dedicated staff for remotes are truly at a disadvantage – far more likely to experience an overburdened staff, missed billing opportunities and quality issues.”

Who should be tasked with taking on these important roles and responsibilities to run an effective cardiac device remote monitoring program? Each clinic is unique and must determine who should fill these roles and what roles are even needed. 

  • Administrative Staff: An administrative role can take on so many non-clinical tasks and provide tremendous help and structure to a remote monitoring program. Our team here at PrepMD finds this role to be absolutely indispensable. The administrative staff can help with so many steps to include scheduling, billing, patient communication and connectivity issues, adding, deleting, and transferring of patients on the websites. This frees up the clinical staff for patient care requirements and can certainly help with overburdening and burnout of all staff.
  • Report Writer: The Report Writer is the clinically trained person who is the primary writer of the device patients’ remote report. This person is carrying out the monitoring of all of the websites. This person should be triaging the downloads, constructing the reports, and communicating with other clinical (secondary reviewer) and administrative staff on next steps. Most often this role is filled by an allied professional (Cardiac Device Specialist) who often holds an IBHRE® certification (CCDS and CDRMS). Some clinics choose to outsource this triaging and/or report-writing to a 3rd party vendor remote monitoring service provider. 
  • Secondary Report Reviewer: Typically, the secondary report reviewer oversees and supervisors the primary report writer. Depending on the clinic, this role may be filled by an experienced cardiac device technician, a nurse, a mid-level, even a physician. This person is responsible for carrying out the recommendations for patient management, while considering the patient history, patient medications, previous indications on the remote reports, and the review of the current data and report. This individual reviews, assesses and makes recommendations for further care management. 
  • Final Report Reviewer: Depending on the clinic, sometimes the final report reviewer is a physician or physician’s assistant who review the final interpretations and signs off on the report. 

There are many complexities to running a quality cardiac device remote monitoring program, resulting in frequent burnout, and overburdening of clinic staff. This can and should be avoided if a clinic takes the time to have a clearly defined process, trained staff and reasonable expectations and allowances to ensure each person responsible is capable of completing tasks with quality, competence, and efficiency.  

Sources:
1 Boriani, Giuseppe and von Wagner, Boriani, “Clinic Time Required for Remote and In-Person Management of Patients With Cardiac Devices: Time and Motion Workflow Evaluation, ” NIH, JMIR Cardio, 2021 Jul-Dec; 5(2): e27720, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8556635/

Female black clinician thumbs up

Best Practices for Running a Cardiac Device Clinic

At a recent PrepMD Webinar a panel discussion was held to share best practices to address the common challenges on cardiac device remote monitoring programs. The panel discussion was led by Rob Lerman, MD, CMO, along with three CCDS-certificated leaders from the PrepMD Clinic Solutions Leadership Team.

Kent Seckinger, CCDS, PrepMD 4+years, cardiac device space for 20 years, working split half between the device industry for manufacturers and the other half working for a large device clinic.

Brianne Terrell, RN, CCDS, PrepMD 1 year, device clinic for about 10 years working in support of device implantation, patient consultation, perioperative device management, in-clinic follow up, and remote monitoring. 

Janet Cedric, CCDS, worked at Prepmd 4.5+ years and in the cardiac space for about 24 years. I’ve managed and started up device clinics. 

Q: Based on your years working in cardiac device clinics, can you share any advice or tips on how clinics handle the staffing requirements needed to run their remote monitoring programs? 

Brianne: I worked in a clinic of all registered nurses and our responsibilities made for very fragmented days.  We were all responsible for seeing device clinic patients in person and handling remote monitoring patients. Obviously, the patients seen in person seemed to always get the most priority. During and after COVID, we ended up having to send many of our nurses to work from home and what we found was we were able to work more efficiently when we had dedicated staff for remote monitoring. So it was really one of those aha moments.

Janet:  I’ve been fortunate enough that the clinics that I worked in had dedicated staff who were well-trained and supported, so they were all very capable of being able to recognize and manage the complex issues of cardiac devices and remote monitoring. Some clinics I’ve been in touch with decided that due to COVID staff changes and shortages they needed to move to a third party vendor to manage their remote monitoring.

Kent: As a clinic increases in patient size, so do the remote transmissions and there comes a balancing point where a limited staff, or in some cases one individual, is responsible for in-person and remote care of device patients. Having a dedicated staff for remote monitoring clearly helps as a clinic grows in size and allows the clinic to manage and improve efficiencies. The best situation to start to improve a device clinic is to be able to have that right mix of in-clinic staff versus dedicated remote staff.

Q: What would you say most clinics feel are the biggest challenges faced with running an effective and efficient remote monitoring program?

Kent: Many of the biggest efficiencies any clinic should achieve is centered around patient education. Too often a patient is sent home after device implantation with a transmitter without any education around the device, the transmitter and the importance of remote monitoring. Spending some dedicated time at the first post-op follow up visit which can take a good 30- 40 minutes is crucial.  Taking time to educate the patient and the family is so crucial. This patient communication and education should clearly explain the benefits of remote monitoring and how this will ultimately make the patient’s life safer and easier by reducing unnecessary in-office visits and hospitalizations. It also helps to explain the billing associated with remote monitoring so they are not surprised or confused. This patient communication will help reduce a lot of that hidden workload and burden on the clinic staff, including unnecessary patient-initiated transmissions or connectivity issues.

Brianne: I find that looking back 10 years ago versus today the remote monitoring population and requirements of any clinic has just exploded and these clinics are feeling the pressure of managing it all. It’s rare that we talk to a clinic that does not feel the need to have more hands on deck to manage their remote monitoring. I would say the biggest challenge most clinics face is the huge remote monitoring workload burden and figuring out the best workflow for their individual clinic.

Janet: I’d say the biggest challenge remote monitoring clinics face is not having the appropriate dedicated staff. We see a lot of benefit from clinics hiring dedicated administrative staff to help with remote monitoring. Especially when the software is integrated with EMR, there are a lot of backend tasks that can be crucial to making things more efficient. There are many times when the remote monitoring staff will need to talk to the in-clinic staff. If you have a dedicated staff for remote monitoring they will be able to identify any patient care problems earlier and get that patient into be seen by a clinician sooner and ultimately providing improved patient care.

Q:Based on your experience, do you have some advice or tips that you can recommend to those trying to start up or improve their remote monitoring program? 

Brianne: The value of a dedicated staff for remote monitoring cannot be underestimated, in addition to the importance of a thorough communication process to educate patients about remote monitoring and ensure their monitors are connected and transmitting.

Kent: If you really want to reduce your clinic workload, it’s really coming down to educating that patient from the start. The result will be fewer patients with disconnected monitors and fewer calls from disgruntled patients who don’t understand the remote monitoring billing. This patient communication is a really crucial step and sets the stage to reduce a lot of that overload, which allows clinics to operate at a much higher efficiency level.

If you are a clinic manager with questions or need help with the management of your cardiac device remote monitoring responsibilities, contact the PrepMD Clinic Solutions Leadership Team.

Medical billing and coding clinician

All Things CIED Remote Monitoring Billing – from experts at Medtronic and PrepMD

Watch Video

For Episode 4 of the PrepMD Webinar Series on remote monitoring for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED), Dr. Robert Lerman, PrepMD CMO spoke with Jason Clyne, Regional Economics Manager for Medtronic CRM about coding, billing, and reimbursement for cardiac rhythm management devices.


Highlights of the PrepMD and Medtronic conversation are below:

Lerman: Jason, I’m really excited to have you with us today. Can you tell us a little bit about what you do as a Regional Economics Manager?

Clyne: Within Medtronic I focus on cardiac rhythm management- the ablation side, certainly pacemakers, ICDs, and cardiac diagnostics such as Linq as well as some of our other portfolios such as Tyrex. My conversations tend to be looking upstream at some of the different tools we have in the market access space and trying to uncover what that population of patients looks like, down to the point of service or procedure- coding, coverage, and payment scenarios. I also speak to the downstream value and all the great clinical outcomes that Medtronic provides as well as the great economic outcomes that accompany those clinical outcomes.

Lerman: Thanks, Jason. So here are a few key concepts that are important. The billing and coding requirements that we’re going to review don’t tell you how often device checks can be done. It is important that those decisions are governed by medical necessity as determined by the provider. We don’t even have control over the frequency of RM transmissions,- even clinicians and 3rd party companies don’t always control the frequency of patient-initiated or alert-generated transmissions. However, we DO have control over how often and for what we bill!

Second, this webinar will focus on traditional fee-for-service Medicare requirements and reimbursement. Even within traditional Medicare, there may be local coverage decisions and different approaches taken by different Medicare Administrative Contractors – or MACs. Additionally, Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, and private payors may all have different requirements such prior authorizations. So always check with your local MAC or payor for detail and requirements for your location.

Before we get into any details, please take a look at the PrepMD and Medtronic disclaimers below1,2 Essentially, the information presented is for information only and does not constitute legal advice or recommendations. Final responsibility for billing and coding is with the provider. While we have tried very hard to provide current and accurate information, even Medicare regulations change frequently, so again please contact your Medicare contractor, other payors, reimbursement specialists, and/or legal counsel for interpretation of coding, coverage, and payment policies.

Clyne: We’re certainly going to have some great conversations but again, not providing any legal advice, and we’re not recommending any clinical practice. That’s up to you the provider at home to constitute for your patients.

Lerman: We’re going to be talking mostly about Medicare rules and regulations. Medicare is a federal health insurance program for people who are predominantly 65 years of age or older. A Medicare Administrative Contractor or MAC is a private healthcare insurer that’s actually been awarded a geographic jurisdiction to process Medicare claims for their fee for service beneficiaries. Medicare relies on a network of MACs to serve as the primary operational contact between the fee for service program and healthcare providers. The MACs have a fair amount of latitude, not only to process claims, but to establish local coverage determinations called LCDs, as well as to review claims and medical records when appropriate. Which is why when say when in doubt to consult your local MAC, that’s what we’re talking about.

Keep in mind that Medicare has a variety of payment programs with different rules and reimbursement policies. Today we are focusing on the Physician Payment program. In this program, payments are made to physicians based on the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule which is updated at least annually on January 1. If you’re working in a hospital or Ambulatory Surgical Center, there are different payments systems and reimbursements differ.

There are some basic questions that you should ask when thinking about billing for CIED monitoring:

  • What kind of devices are being monitored?
  • Where is the service being performed?
  • Should the service be billed globally or as separate technical and professional components?
  • Who is performing the technical and professional components? Are modifiers necessary?
  • What procedures are performed and what are the corresponding CPTâ codes?
  • Are the services billable based on timing requirements?

So Jason, how often should CIEDs be monitored?

Clyne: It ultimately goes back to the provider. The provider knows the medical history, the indication for the device, and what follow-up routine is the best fit for a given patient. That’s where the guidance should start. What we’ll talk about now are guidelines, not mandates, but they help develop a routine for your clinic.

CMS has put out a national coverage determination for pacemakers, but note that it hasn’t been updated since 1984. It speaks to routine and asymptomatic management, that being one device evaluation per year for single chamber pacemakers and one every six months for dual chamber devices. Place of service is not specified. Some of the Medicare Administrative Contractors have started to put in some further language to help clarify, likely because there have been a lot of changes in our therapeutics since 1984. So for example we have a local coverage determination from Novitas for pacemakers that acknowledges that for symptomatic patients, the CMS guidance for routine follow-up can be combined with either remote or in-person follow-up with a reasonable frequency when medically necessary. We certainly advise that you look at your local guidance from your local Medicare Administrative Contractor. Also from a CPT® code perspective, the CPT® codes have finite guidelines, but from a remote monitoring standpoint we’re really looking at once every 90 days, a period of time that we’re going to monitor this.

The societies provide some further guidance. HRS updated their guidelines in 2015 and there may be an eventual change to this in the future. But the guidelines speak to at least one in-office transmission per year versus remote transmissions on the pacemaker side anywhere from every 3-12 months. So again, there is some variability there and the same applies on the ICD side with every 3-6 months, so there is some leeway there but at the same time some guidance as to how these patients should be managed.

Lerman: I think it is important to reinforce that the national coverage decision from CMS on pacemakers hasn’t been updated since 1984, which we know predates the modern era of remote monitoring, and they provided no guidance on ICDs at all. So as Jason pointed out, we have to rely on some of the local MACs decisions as well as the CPT® code guidance and that from the societies. We seem to get along pretty well, but it is interesting that CMS hasn’t made a national update in quite some time. In addition to the timing requirements, which we’ll discuss in further detail, there are some additional Medicare requirements around documentation and physician supervision. Jason, can you talk about some of those?

Clyne: Device interrogation whether remote or in-person is a diagnostic test. Like any diagnostic test being performed it requires a written order. The order needs to originate from the practitioner who uses the results to treat the patient. The patient medical record needs to clearly document the practitioner’s intent that the test be performed. In addition, medical necessity documentation is important, and this will come into play later when we discuss heart failure diagnostics and implantable physiological monitoring. Patient history and indication for the device can be utilized, but then specific to the individual test, what is the reasoning for ordering the test? What findings are being sought, and what are the results of those tests and how will they be used to manage the patient’s clinical issues? Each parameter tested and the results should be maintained in the medical record.

The next question to be addressed, whether the diagnostic tests are remote or in-person interrogation, is what kind of supervision is required? Most of the time it is a technician or a nurse that is completing the interrogation, whether in-person or remote. From a remote monitoring perspective, all that is required is general supervision. General supervision occurs when the procedure is provided under the supervising practitioner’s overall direction and control, but the supervising practitioner’s presence is not required during the performance of the procedure. The supervising physician is responsible for ensuring that there is proper training for the non-physician personnel that is performing the diagnostic test and that the equipment is maintained and proper supplies are provided.

The in-person interrogation is a different story, as now there is a patient in front of us, and maybe there is an opportunity for medical intervention as needed. So now there is a need for direct supervision. That direct supervision can be provided by a physician or now, a non-physician provider (NPP) such as a nurse practitioner or PA. They don’t need to be specifically in the room with you, but they should be close by in order to perform medical intervention if needed. A question arises for a hospital-based clinic that what if the physician is in the cath lab performing a procedure? Even though they are in the same building, if they are not immediately available to provide assistance and direction, then it does not qualify as direct supervision.

Lerman:  The general supervision requirements for remote are what allows third party companies to participate in remote monitoring, because they can be done under the general supervision of the physician, who is not required to be in the same facility.

Clyne: That’s right.

Lerman: One of the things that differentiates in-person device checks from remote device checks is the concept of whether they are billed based upon global CPT® codes or individual technical and professional codes. For in-person checks, global codes exist, which encompass both the technical and professional components. If you are only reporting one of the professional or technical codes, a modifier is used. For example, if you are only billing the professional component, you would add a -26 modifier to the global code, and if you are only reporting the technical component, you would add a -TC modifier. One example of where these modifiers might be used is if an industry representative is performing the technical component of the in-person check. In that situation, the appropriate billing for the clinic or the physician is the -26 modifier for the professional component only.

On the remote side it is largely different. With one exception there are separate technical and professional CPT® codes. Third-party companies will frequently perform the technical component under general supervision, while the clinic practitioners perform the professional component of the evaluation. It is important to note that remote CPT® codes are appropriate whenever a patient is not physically at a healthcare facility to receive this service. Jason, can you help us better understand some of the details that distinguish the professional component from the technical component?

Clyne: The professional component is that physician’s interpretation of the diagnostic test performed and all findings included in a written report as well as relevant clinical issues. For in-person monitoring services it also includes all components of supervision of the diagnostic testing. The technical component can include a number of things, including the technician or nurse receiving and downloading the data and performing technical interpretation and distributing the results. The technical component includes all non-physician work performed, including the cost of administrative personnel, capital equipment and facility costs, and related malpractice expenses. One would think that the reimbursement would be heavily weighted towards the professional because that’s where a lot of the interpretation is being done, but there is a lot of work on the technical side that goes on behind the scenes.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

In part two of Remote Monitoring Billing and Coding we’ll discuss the individual remote monitoring CPT® codes, the concept and rules behind monitoring time intervals, and how dates of service variations create challenges for billing compliance.

1 PrepMD Disclaimer: PrepMD provides this information for general information purposes only. It does not constitute PrepMD makes no guarantee that the use of this information will prevent differences of opinion or viewed as instructions for selecting any particular code. Please contact your Medicare contractor, other payers, reimbursement specialists, and/or legal counsel for interpretation of coding, coverage and payment policies.

This document provides assistance for FDA approved or cleared indications.
CPT® copyright 2022 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. CPT is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association. Applicable FARS/DFARS restrictions apply to government use. Fee schedules, relative value units, conversion factors and/or related components are not assigned by the AMA, are not part of CPT, and the AMA is not recommending their use. The AMA does not directly or indirectly practice medicine or dispense medical services. The AMA assumes no liability for the data contained or not contained herein.

2 Medtronic Disclaimer: Medtronic provides this information for your convenience only. It does not constitute legal advice or a recommendation regarding clinical practice. Information provided is gathered from third-party sources and is subject to change without notice due to frequently changing laws, rules and regulations. The provider has the responsibility to determine medical necessity and to submit appropriate codes and charges for care provided. Medtronic makes no guarantee that the use of this information will prevent differences of opinion or disputes with Medicare or other payers as to the correct form of billing or the amount that will be paid to providers of service. Please contact your Medicare contractor, other payers, reimbursement specialists and/or legal counsel for interpretation of coding, coverage and payment policies. This document provides assistance for FDA approved or cleared indications. Where reimbursement is sought for use of a product that may be inconsistent with, or not expressly specified in, the FDA cleared or approved labeling (e.g., instructions for use, operator’s manual or package insert), consult with your billing advisors or payers on handling such billing issues. Some payers may have policies that make it inappropriate to submit claims for such items or related service.

CPT copyright 2021 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. CPT is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use. Fee schedules, relative value units, conversion factors and/or related components are not assigned by the AMA, are not part of CPT, and the AMA is not recommending their use. The AMA does not directly or i