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... Show moreObjective: 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 reim-bursement 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 hos-pital settings in the Netherlands. Our results emphasize that the successful integration of structural reimburse-ment 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 moni-toring 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 organizational 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 stim-ulate the collaboration of healthcare stakeholders responsible for implementing and scaling up remote patient monitoring projects. Show less
ObjectiveStructural 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... Show moreObjectiveStructural 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsMultiple 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.ConclusionOur 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. Show less
Background: The Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) is a nationwide mandatory quality registry that evaluates the perioperative outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The DSAA includes... Show moreBackground: The Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) is a nationwide mandatory quality registry that evaluates the perioperative outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The DSAA includes perioperative outcomes that occur up to 30 days, but various complications following AAA repair occur after this period. Administrative healthcare data yield the possibility to evaluate later occuring outcomes such as reinterventions, without increasing the registration burden. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and the potential benefit of administrative healthcare data to evaluate mid-term reinterventions following intact AAA repair. Method: All patients that underwent primary endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or open surgical repair (OSR) for an intact infrarenal AAA between January 2017 and December 2018 were selected from the DSAA. Subsequently, these patients were identified in a database containing reimbursement data. Healthcare activity codes that refer to reinterventions following AAA repair were examined to assess reinterventions within 12 and 15 months following EVAR and OSR. Results: We selected 4043 patients from the DSAA, and 2059 (51%) patients could be identified in the administrative healthcare database. Reintervention rates of 10.4% following EVAR and 9.5% following OSR within 12 months (p = 0.719), and 11.5% following EVAR and 10.8% following OSR within 15 months (p = 0.785) were reported. Conclusion: Administrative healthcare data as an addition to the DSAA is potentially beneficial to evaluate midterm reinterventions following intact AAA repair without increasing the registration burden for clinicians. Further validation is necessary before reliable implementation of this tool is warranted. Show less
