More Like this

1. A Framework for Scalable and Sustainable Remote Patient Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes Care

   https://doi.org/10.3390/endocrines7030038  

   Alonso, Guy Todd; Reddy, Sushma; Bishop, Franziska K; Prahalad, Priya; Khan-Gallo, Saira; Arbiter, Brandon; Crossen, Stephanie S (September 2026, Endocrines)

   Despite increasing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated insulin delivery, most children and adolescents living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the US do not achieve recommended glycemic targets. Structured, proactive support improves glycemic outcomes, but diabetes teams have historically lacked reimbursement pathways and scalable workflows to support between-visit care. The introduction of remote patient monitoring (RPM) billing codes has created new opportunities to align clinical need with care delivery models, although adoption remains limited. We describe implementation experiences from three pediatric diabetes centers that developed RPM programs across distinct clinical populations and institutional environments. Each site developed workflows for data review, patient outreach, documentation, and billing, supported by digital platforms designed to facilitate population-level management. Common themes emerged around needs for structured patient onboarding, multidisciplinary team alignment, standardized documentation, efficient data aggregation and population health management tools, adaptable communication pathways, and financial alignment. This practice-informed commentary synthesizes common themes across these programs and outlines key considerations for RPM implementation, including workflow design, digital infrastructure, communication strategies, and reimbursement structures. We also highlight practical challenges related to equity, patient engagement, and operational feasibility. This report aims to contextualize early clinical experience with RPM and identify factors that may influence its integration into pediatric diabetes care. 

   more » « less
2. More isn’t always better: Technology in the intensive care unit

   https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000398  

   Olsen, Esther; Novikov, Zhanna; Sakata, Theadora; Lambert, Monique H; Lorenzo, Javier; Bohn, Roger; Singer, Sara J (February 2024, Health Care Management Review)

   BackgroundClinical care in modern intensive care units (ICUs) combines multidisciplinary expertise and a complex array of technologies. These technologies have clearly advanced the ability of clinicians to do more for patients, yet so much equipment also presents the possibility for cognitive overload. PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate clinicians’ experiences with and perceptions of technology in ICUs. Methodology/ApproachWe analyzed qualitative data from 30 interviews with ICU clinicians and frontline managers within four ICUs. ResultsOur interviews identified three main challenges associated with technology in the ICU: (a) too many technologies and too much data; (b) inconsistent and inaccurate technologies; and (c) not enough integration among technologies, alignment with clinical workflows, and support for clinician identities. To address these challenges, interviewees highlighted mitigation strategies to address both social and technical systems and to achieve joint optimization. ConclusionWhen new technologies are added to the ICU, they have potential both to improve and to disrupt patient care. To successfully implement technologies in the ICU, clinicians’ perspectives are crucial. Understanding clinicians’ perspectives can help limit the disruptive effects of new technologies, so clinicians can focus their time and attention on providing care to patients. Practice ImplicationsAs technology and data continue to play an increasingly important role in ICU care, everyone involved in the design, development, approval, implementation, and use of technology should work together to apply a sociotechnical systems approach to reduce possible negative effects on clinical care for critically ill patients. 

   more » « less
3. Building a Diabetes Educator Program for Remote Patient Monitoring Billing

   https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241308920  

   Bishop, Franziska K; Chmielewski, Annette; Leverenz, Jeannine; Lin, Shannon; Conrad, Barry; Martinez-Singh, Anjoli; Pike, Laura; Scheinker, David; Prahalad, Priya; Maahs, David M (May 2026, Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology)

   Objective:Develop workflows and billing processes for a Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialist (CDCES)-led remote patient monitoring (RPM) program to transition the Teamwork, Targets, Technology, and Tight Control (4T) Study to our clinic’s standard of care. Methods:We identified stakeholders within a pediatric endocrinology clinic (hospital compliance, billing specialists, and clinical informatics) to identify, discuss, and approve billing codes and workflow. The group evaluated billing code stipulations, such as the timing of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) interpretation, scope of work, providers’ licensing, and electronic health record (EHR) documentation to meet billing compliance standards. We developed a CDCES workflow for asynchronous CGM interpretation and intervention and initiated an RPM billing pilot. Results:We built a workflow for CGM interpretation (billing code: 95251) with the CDCES as the service provider. The workflow includes data review, patient communications, and documentation. Over the first month of the pilot, RPM billing codes were submitted for 52 patients. The average reimbursement rate was $110.33 for commercial insurance (60% of patients) and $46.95 for public insurance (40% of patients) per code occurrence. Conclusions:Continuous involvement of CDCES and hospital stakeholders was essential to operationalize all relevant aspects of clinical care, workflows, compliance, documentation, and billing. CGM interpretation with RPM billing allows CDCES to work at the top of their licensing credential, increase clinical care touch points, and provide a business case for expansion. As evidence of the clinical benefits of RPM increases, the processes developed here may facilitate broader adoption of revenue-generating CDCES-led care to fund RPM. 

   more » « less
4. A Qualitative Analysis of Remote Patient Monitoring: How a Paradox Mindset Can Support Balancing Emotional Tensions in the Design of Healthcare Technologies

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3710922  

   Jonassen, Zoe; Lawrence, Katharine; Wiesenfeld, Batia Mishan; Feuerriegel, Stefan; Mann, Devin (May 2025, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is the use of digital technologies to improve patient care at a distance. However, current RPM solutions are often biased toward tech-savvy patients. To foster health equity, researchers have studied how to address the socio-economic and cognitive needs of diverse patient groups, but their emotional needs have remained largely neglected. We perform the first qualitative study to explore the emotional needs of diverse patients around RPM. Specifically, we conduct a thematic analysis of 18 interviews and 4 focus groups at a large US healthcare organization. We identify emotional needs that lead to four emotional tensions within and across stakeholder groups when applying an equity focus to the design and implementation of RPM technologies. The four emotional tensions are making diverse patients feel: (i) heard vs. exploited; (ii) seen vs. deprioritized for efficiency; (iii) empowered vs. anxious; and (iv) cared for vs. detached from care. To manage these emotional tensions across stakeholders, we develop design recommendations informed by a paradox mindset (i.e., both-and rather than and-or strategies). 

   more » « less
5. Patients Waiting for Cues: Information Asymmetries and Challenges in Sharing Patient-Generated Data in the Clinic

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3512954  

   Oh, Chi Young; Luo, Yuhan; St. Jean, Beth; Choe, Eun Kyoung (March 2022, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Patient-generated data (PGD) show great promise for informing the delivery of personalized and patient-centered care. However, patients' data tracking does not automatically lead to data sharing and discussion with clinicians, which can make it difficult to utilize and derive optimal benefit from PGD. In this paper, we investigate whether and how patients share their PGD with clinicians and the types of challenges that arise within this context. We describe patients' immediate experiences of PGD sharing with clinicians, based on our short onsite interviews with 57 patients who had just met with a clinician at a university health center. Our analyses identified overarching patterns in patients' PGD sharing practices and the associated challenges that arise from the information asymmetry between patients and clinicians and from patients' reliance on their memory to share their PGD. We discuss the implications of our findings for designing PGD-integrated health IT systems in ways to support patients' tracking of relevant PGD, clinicians' effective engagement with patients around PGD, and the efficient sharing and review of PGD within clinical settings. 

   more » « less