Heart failure (HF) monitoring is a powerful tool for proactive care—but only if it’s done right. Many cardiac device clinics hesitate to fully leverage HF diagnostics from CRT devices due to the operational complexities and coordination challenges that follow. The result? Missed opportunities for early intervention, increased provider burden, and inconsistent patient outcomes.
At the heart of the issue lies a simple truth: CRT devices report both HF and arrhythmia data, yet our systems—and teams—aren’t always set up to handle that dual functionality effectively.
I. Clinical & Operational Challenges in HF Monitoring
Shared Devices, Separate Teams
CRT devices provide both HF and arrhythmia diagnostics. But often, these diagnostics are routed to different care teams—electrophysiology (EP) and heart failure (HF)—without a coordinated plan. This disconnect creates confusion, duplication, and sometimes missed data that could be critical to patient care.
Mismatched Cadence Creates Risk
- EP reports traditionally follow a 91-day cadence.
- HF monitoring, when applied, typically requires a 31-day cadence.
- Since diagnostics are combined in a single data stream, parsing them by specialty and cadence becomes complex and manual.
This mismatch can result in clinically relevant HF data going unreviewed for weeks—an unacceptable risk in vulnerable HF patients.
Billing & Assignment Confusion
Proper billing and team assignment depend on accurate segmentation of device diagnostics. But with no built-in workflow to support it, clinics often face errors, compliance risks, or administrative overload. Many respond by opting out of HF monitoring entirely—missing its clinical value to avoid operational headaches.
Patient-Specific Needs Not Met
Not every patient requires monthly HF monitoring. Yet without a flexible system, clinics are forced into a binary choice:
- Monitor all HF patients every 31 days (costly and inefficient), or
- Don’t monitor at all (risking late detection of deterioration).
II. PrepMD OMNI’s Functional Benefits: Built for Clinicians and Collaboration!
PrepMD OMNI was built with one goal in mind—make it easier for clinicians to deliver smart, compliant, patient-centered care.
Dynamic Monitoring Cadence
Start all patients on the standard 91-day cadence. When HF alerts arise, PrepMD OMNI enables an easy addition—to a 31-day cadence. Once stabilized, patients can return to the 91-day track. This dynamic system supports precision care without overburdening staff or patients.
Specialty-Aligned Report Assignment
PrepMD OMNI routes:
- EP diagnostics to the EP team
- HF diagnostics to the HF team
And when collaboration is needed, both teams can view the full patient profile—ensuring shared insight without duplication or miscommunication.
Group Assignments Enable Real Collaboration
Assign shared cases to both HF and EP teams with full visibility and role-based action. PrepMD OMNI breaks down silos and fosters multidisciplinary care in a way that legacy systems simply can’t.
Automated Compliance with Billing Intervals
PrepMD OMNI’s Care Cycles engine automatically:
- Tracks rolling report logic
- Monitors date-of-service for every patient
- Ensures CMS billing compliance
All without relying on manual tracking.
III. Patient-Centered Outcomes
By solving operational challenges, PrepMD OMNI enables better clinical results:
- Timely escalation and de-escalation of care
- Unified care plans from HF and EP teams
- Clinically appropriate monitoring without overreach
- Fewer billing surprises, thanks to responsive cadence changes
- Improved patient confidence in their care team’s coordination
These capabilities are fully aligned with the latest ACC/AHA Guidelines on the Management of Heart Failure, which emphasize proactive monitoring, team-based care, and individualized treatment decisions (ACC/AHA/HFSA 2022 Guidelines).
Despite clear clinical benefit, adoption of HF-specific remote monitoring remains low. A 2023 narrative review published in Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review noted that structured HF monitoring using CRT diagnostics is implemented in fewer than 30% of eligible patients—largely due to workflow fragmentation and system limitations.
IV. A Final Word to Clinicians
The 2023 HRS Expert Consensus Statement reinforces a clear direction for CIED-based remote monitoring: it should be dynamic, collaborative, and tailored to patient-specific needs. Yet for many clinics, operational barriers stand in the way of delivering that level of care.
PrepMD OMNI bridges that gap. It enables true interdisciplinary coordination between EP and HF teams, supports patient-specific cadence adjustments, and ensures billing compliance—all without adding administrative burden.
CIED-based HF monitoring doesn’t have to be fragmented, risky, or inefficient. With PrepMD OMNI, it becomes a coordinated, clinically responsible, and precisely tailored care experience—fully aligned with HRS guidelines and built for real-world clinical practice.
References
- Heidenreich PA, et al. “2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure.” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2022.
- Singh JP, Varma N. “Device-Based Monitoring of Heart Failure: Evolution of a Clinical Paradigm.” Arrhythmia & Electrophysiology Review, April 24, 2023.
- Ferrick A, et al. “HRS Expert Consensus Statement on Remote Monitoring of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.” Heart Rhythm Society, 2023.
