Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 May 19;11(5):e0155738.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155738. eCollection 2016.

Remote Monitoring of Chronic Diseases: A Landscape Assessment of Policies in Four European Countries

Katherine Rojahn  1 , Suzanne Laplante  1 , James Sloand  1 , Claire Main  2 , Aftab Ibrahim  2 , Janet Wild  2 , Nicky Sturt  2 , Thelga Areteou  3 , K Ian Johnson  3
Affiliations

Remote Monitoring of Chronic Diseases: A Landscape Assessment of Policies in Four European Countries

Katherine Rojahn et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Remote monitoring (RM) is defined as the surveillance of device-transmitted outpatient data. RM is expected to enable better management of chronic diseases. The objective of this research was to identify public policies concerning RM in four European countries.

Methods: Searches of the medical literature, the Internet, and Ministry of Health websites for the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, Italy, and Spain were performed in order to identify RM policies for chronic diseases, including end stage renal disease (ESRD), chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD), diabetes, heart failure, and hypertension. Searches were first performed in Q1 2014 and updated in Q4 2015. In addition, in depth interviews were conducted with payers/policymakers in each country. Information was obtained on existing policies, disease areas and RM services covered and level of reimbursement, other incentives such as quality indicators, past/current assessments of RM technologies, diseases perceived to benefit most from RM, and concerns about RM.

Results: Policies on RM and/or telemedicine were identified in all four countries. Pilot projects (mostly in diabetes, COPD, and/or heart failure) existed or were planned in most countries. Perceived value of RM was moderate to high, with the highest rating given for heart failure. Interviewees expressed concerns about sharing of medical information, and the need for capital investment. Patients recently discharged from hospital, and patients living remotely, or with serious and/or complicated diseases, were believed to be the most likely to benefit from RM. Formal reimbursement is scarce, but more commonly available for patients with heart failure.

Conclusions: In the four European countries surveyed, RM has attracted considerable interest for its potential to increase the efficiency of healthcare for chronic diseases. Although rare at this moment, incentives to use RM technology are likely to increase in the near future as the body of evidence of clinical and/or economic benefit grows.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The company selected by Baxter to conduct the study was Double Helix. Baxter Healthcare provided honoraria to TA and KIJ, as employees of Double Helix. TA and KIJ were involved in study conduct, data collection, analysis, and reporting as articulated in the 'author contributions' section. Baxter Healthcare has no ownership or legal relationship with Double Helix other than the contract for this study. The respective commercial affiliations of the authors does not alter the authors' adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, with the exception of the primary research data as described in Data Availability section.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Potential for RM in UK, Germany, Italy and Spain, by chronic disease.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Doarn CR, Pruitt S, Jacobs J, Harris Y, Bott DM, Riley W, et al. Federal efforts to define and advance telehealth—a work in progress. Telemed J E Health. 2014;20(5):409–18. 10.1089/tmj.2013.0336 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chronaki CE, Vardas P. Remote monitoring costs, benefits, and reimbursement: a European perspective. Europace. 2013;15 Suppl 1:i59–i64. 10.1093/europace/eut110 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Flodgren G, Rachas A, Farmer AJ, Inzitari M, Shepperd S. Interactive telemedicine: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;9:CD002098 10.1002/14651858.CD002098.pub2 . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clark RA, Inglis SC, McAlister FA, Cleland JG, Stewart S. Telemonitoring or structured telephone support programmes for patients with chronic heart failure: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2007;334(7600):942 10.1136/bmj.39156.536968.55 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jaana M, Pare G. Home telemonitoring of patients with diabetes: a systematic assessment of observed effects. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(2):242–53. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00686.x . - DOI - PubMed

Publication types