Abstract
Background Despite guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) being recognized to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), optimization has been limited resulting in worse outcomes and exorbitant costs. Although remote patient monitoring (RPM) has proven to help improve patient care, implementation of RPM at scale leading to healthcare cost savings has not been demonstrated.
Methods Patients from 11 states were enrolled from August 2021 to April 2023 in a virtual heart failure (HF) program offered by Cadence. Eligible patients were Medicare beneficiaries with a history of an ejection fraction (EF) <40%. A clinical team monitored patient daily vitals measured on a cellular enabled blood pressure (BP) cuff, heart rate monitor and weight scale. Clinical visits using technology enabled clinical protocols were also conducted on a regular basis to facilitate guideline directed clinical interventions including symptom, vital and medication optimization. Cost analysis used 5 years of de-identified healthcare claims data from an Accountable Care Organization (ACO) and calculated average monthly healthcare costs using the 4-month period of January-April for each year. We then used a Differences-in-Differences analysis to estimate the effect of Cadence on average monthly healthcare costs compared to ACO patients who were ordered for Cadence but did not enroll.
Results Total of 367 patients (mean [SD]: age 74 [11] years; EF 45 [2] %; systolic BP (SBP) 131 [19] mmHg; n [%]: 122 women [33%]; 260 white (71%)) were followed for a median of 294 days. There was a significant decrease in patients’ BP (SBP -6.9, Diastolic BP -4.9 mmHg; p<0.001) and weight (−2.1 lbs; p=0.010) but not heart rate. Patients experienced significant increases in the use of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (92 [26%] to 165 [45%]; p<0.001) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (120 [33%] to 144 [39%]; p=0.002) but not β-blockers or renin-angiotensin system antagonists. The percentage of patients on ≥50% target dose significantly increased for all pillars of GDMT. There was also a significant increase in the percentage of patients on all 4 pillars of GDMT at follow (84 [23%] vs. 26 [7%]; p<0.001). A total of 70 enrolled and 42 ordered but not enrolled HF patients were included in the ACO analysis. Compared to ordered but not enrolled patients, enrollment in Cadence resulted in a 52% (-$1,076.64 per HF patient per month) cost reduction, with the most significant reductions related to hospitalizations and hospital associated spending.
Conclusions We present the first evidence to support the use of a remote patient intervention program that leverages RPM and technology supported clinical interventions to not only improve the use and dose of GDMT for HFrEF patients but also reduce total and hospital associated costs.
Competing Interest Statement
DIF and MF are advisors at Cadence; MLC, TF and RC are employees at Cadence
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of Duke University gave ethical approval for this work. IRB # Pro00114791
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Disclosures: DIF and MF are advisors at Cadence; MLC, TF and RC are employees at Cadence
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
