ABSTRACT
Objective Structural reimbursement can be an important factor for large-scale implementing and upscaling of remote patient monitoring (RPM). During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Dutch Healthcare Authority expanded regulations, creating novel opportunities to reimburse RPM. Despite these regulations, barriers to the reimbursement of RPM remain. This study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of structural reimbursement of RPM in hospital care in the Netherlands and to propose actionable recommendations. Methods This is an exploratory qualitative study with relevant stakeholders in the Dutch purchasing market: the Dutch Healthcare Authority, health insurers, and healthcare providers. Semi-structured interviews were held between October and December of 2020. All interviews were conducted using a digital medium, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. Results Multiple perceived barriers were mentioned: wrong pocket problems (i.e. the entity that bears the costs of implementation does not receive the benefits), no uniform quality and outcome indicators, lack of willingness to redesign care pathways by providers, and difficulties implementing cross-sector models. Perceived facilitators included interdisciplinary cooperation and transparency, the use of alternative payment models, increase in the total number of patients per RPM project, and the optional reimbursement scheme. Conclusion Our interviews found barriers and facilitators concerning structural reimbursement of RPM in hospital settings in the Netherlands. Our results emphasize that the successful integration of structural reimbursement requires: 1) understanding the improvement potential of RPM by creating business cases, 2) co-creation (redesigning care paths) from the outset of an RPM project, 3) and allocating financial risk by providers and insurers. Public Interest Summary The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the strong potential of consultation and monitoring patients at a distance. Remote patient monitoring - the use of information technologies for monitoring patients at a distance - is seen as a potential solution to urgent challenges in the healthcare system. Nevertheless, embedding remote patient monitoring innovations into routine healthcare is often challenging, partly due to difficulties in reimbursing these initiatives. Barriers to reimbursing remote patient monitoring included zorganizational factors, no uniform quality and outcome indicators, and difficulties using different payment models. Perceived facilitators included an increase in the total number of patients per project, better interdisciplinary cooperation and transparency, and help from the Dutch Healthcare Authority. Introducing these insights into healthcare policy dialogues could support reimbursement of remote patient monitoring and stimulate the collaboration of healthcare stakeholders responsible for implementing and scaling up remote patient monitoring projects.
ABSTRACT
AIM: To follow-up previous work evaluating incidental findings of COVID-19 signs on computed tomography (CT) images of major trauma patients to include the second wave prior to any major effects from vaccines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population included all patients admitted following major trauma between 1 January 2020 and 28 February 2021 with CT including the lungs (n=1776). Major trauma patients admitted pre-COVID-19 from alternate months from January 2019 to November 2019 comprised a control group (n=837). The assessing radiologists were blinded to the time period and used double reading in consensus to determine if the patient had signs of COVID-19. Lung appearances were classified as no evidence of COVID-19, minor signs, or major signs. RESULTS: The method successfully tracked the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in London. The estimated population affected by the disease based on those with major signs was similar to estimates of the proportion of the population in London with antibodies (around 30% by end February 2021) and the total of major and minor signs produced a much higher figure of 68%, which may include all those with both antibody and just T-cell responses. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental findings on CT from major trauma patients may provide a novel and sensitive way of tracking the virus. It is recommended that all major trauma units include a simple question on signs of COVID-19 to provide an early warning system for further waves.