Real-World Adherence and Effectiveness of Remote Patient Monitoring Among Medicaid Patients With Diabetes: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of diabetes in the United States is high and increasing, and it is also the most expensive chronic condition in the United States. Self-monitoring of blood glucose or continuous glucose monitoring are potential solutions, but there are barriers to their use. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) with appropriate support has the potential to provide solutions. OBJECTIVE: We aim to investigate the adherence of Medicaid patients with diabetes to daily RPM protocols, the relationship between adherence and changes in blood glucose levels, and the impact of daily testing time on blood glucose changes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed real-world data from an RPM company that provides services to Texas Medicaid patients with diabetes. Overall, 180 days of blood glucose data from an RPM company were collected to assess transmission rates and blood glucose changes, after the first 30 days of data were excluded due to startup effects. Patients were separated into adherent and nonadherent cohorts, where adherent patients transmitted data on at least 120 of the 150 days. z tests and t tests were performed to compare transmission rates and blood glucose changes between 2 cohorts. In addition, we analyzed blood glucose changes based on their testing time—between 1 AM and 10 AM, 10 AM and 6 PM, and 6 PM and 1 AM. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 70.5 (SD 11.8) years, with 66.8% (n=255) of them being female, 91.9% (n=351) urban, and 89% (n=340) from south Texas (n=382). The adherent cohort (n=186, 48.7%) had a mean transmission rate of 82.8% before the adherence call and 91.1% after. The nonadherent cohort (n=196, 51.3%) had a mean transmission rate of 45.9% before and 60.2% after. The mean blood glucose levels of the adherent cohort decreased by an average of 9 mg/dL (P=.002) over 5 months. We also found that variability of blood glucose level of the adherent cohort improved 3 mg/dL (P=.03) over the 5-month period. Both cohorts had the majority of their transmissions between 1 AM and 10 AM, with 70.5% and 53.2% for the adherent and nonadherent cohorts, respectively. The adherent cohort had decreasing mean blood glucose levels over 5 months, with the largest decrease during the 6 PM to 1 AM time period (30.9 mg/dL). Variability of blood glucose improved only for those tested from 10 AM to 6 PM, with improvements of 6.9 mg/dL (P=.02). Those in the nonadherent cohort did not report significant changes. CONCLUSIONS: RPM can help manage diabetes in Medicaid clients by improving adherence rates and glycemic control. Adherence calls helped improve adherence rates, but some patients still faced challenges in transmitting blood glucose levels. Nonetheless, RPM has the potential to reduce the risk of adverse outcomes associated with diabetes.