The Proof › Outcomes
What the monitored population actually did.
Headline outcomes
−14.1 mmHgWhere this number comes fromPopulation30,098 monitored patientsSourceHealthSnap national platform analysis, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
mean systolic, 30,098 monitored patients
−8.0 mmHgWhere this number comes fromPopulation30,098 monitored patientsSourceCMS evidence binder, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
mean diastolic reduction, 30,098 monitored patients
70.8%Where this number comes fromPopulation30,098 monitored patientsSourceCMS evidence binder, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
below 140/90 at last reading, 30,098 monitored patients
−$10,932Where this number comes fromPopulation597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiariesSourceTelemedicine and e-Health, 2026 · DOI pendingVerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
median annual total cost of care per patient, 597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiaries
Blood-pressure figures are drawn from the full monitored population. Cost figures are from 597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiaries over one year. Observational and single-arm.
Utilization
−40.9%Where this number comes fromPopulation597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiariesSourceTelemedicine and e-Health, 2026 · DOI pendingVerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
inpatient hospitalizations, 597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiaries
−19.9%Where this number comes fromPopulation597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiariesSourceTelemedicine and e-Health, 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
emergency department visits, 597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiaries
52.8% → 25.8%
share with at least one hospitalization, 597 high-acuity Medicare beneficiaries
All three from the same 597-beneficiary cohort. Do not read these as causal: the design does not support it.
Peer-reviewed publications
- Published
Healthcare (MDPI) 2024;12(16):1583
Remote Patient Monitoring Is Associated with Improved Outcomes in Hypertension: A Large, Retrospective, Cohort Analysis
DOI 10.3390/healthcare12141451
- Published
Telemedicine and e-Health 2026
Short-Term Impact of Remote Patient Monitoring on Total Cost of Care Among High-Acuity Medicare Beneficiaries
DOI pending
Conference research
Five peer-reviewed presentations to American Heart Association Scientific Sessions.
Engagement dose-response
Presented 2025Every 10% increase in transmission frequency associated with roughly 1.2 mmHg additional systolic lowering.
Home versus office concordance
Presented 2025Home and office systolic reductions agreed within 0.4 mmHg (p=0.44).
Interruption and reinitiation
Presented 2025Stopping monitoring was followed by measurable rebound; re-enrolling restored prior gains within five months.
Readings in target range
Submitted 2026 · under reviewAmong patients whose 12-month average was controlled, only 55.3% had at least 80% of readings in range.
Longitudinal alert dynamics
Submitted 2026 · under reviewAlert-day rates fell 75–83% across every alert type once normalized to transmission volume.
More engagement, larger reductions — inside every severity band.
Patients transmitting 6–7 days a week averaged −16.9 mmHg with 79.8% reaching target, against −11.5 mmHg and 60.4% for those transmitting three days or fewer. The gradient held in all four baseline severity bands.
The care model is the mechanism
The readings do not manage themselves.
Across 68,431 patients on one platform, identical devices, portal, alerting, EHR integration and billing, the only variable that differed was who provided the care navigation. Patients supported by HealthSnap navigators transmitted on 46.1% of days against 26.1% for other navigation, fell 18.5 mmHg systolic against 14.9, and reached control 66.5% against 56.7%.
The counter-intuitive part: navigated programs generated 36% fewer medium-severity and 44% fewer high-severity alerts per patient despite nearly twice the transmission volume, and median response was 4.2 hours against 6.3. Because technology is held constant and only staffing varies, this is closer to a natural experiment than a vendor comparison.
The care model, compared against itself
18.5 vs 14.9 mmHg
systolic reduction, navigated vs not, 68,431-patient within-platform comparison
66.5% vs 56.7%
reached control, 68,431-patient within-platform comparison
4.2 hoursWhere this number comes fromPopulationnavigated patients, 68,431-patient within-platform comparisonSourceCMS evidence binder, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
median response to a high-severity alert, navigated patients, 68,431-patient within-platform comparison
A 68,431-patient within-platform comparison: identical devices, portal, alerting and billing, with only the staffing model differing. Navigated patients transmitted 77% more often and generated fewer medium- and high-severity alerts despite nearly twice the transmission volume.
What the calls actually carry
1,354,099Where this number comes fromPopulation14,503 patientsSourceCMS evidence binder, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
care-navigation notes, 14,503 patients
60.5%Where this number comes fromPopulation1,354,099 notes across 14,503 patientsSourceCMS evidence binder, Aug 2026VerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
of notes document medication-adherence support, 1,354,099 notes across 14,503 patients
24.2% of notes carry physical activity counseling, over 327,000 notes, and 22.7% nutrition counseling, over 307,000 notes. Across 1,354,099 care-navigation notes spanning 14,503 patients, sodium reduction appears in 14.8% and guideline-named DASH or Mediterranean patterns in 7.9%. These are not adjacent wellness topics: each domain maps to a quantified blood-pressure effect in the ACC/AHA guideline, DASH to roughly 11 mmHg, sodium reduction to 5–6, aerobic activity to 5–8. First-line therapy, delivered at a frequency the office visit cannot match.
Surveillance & safety
Patients stabilize — and the alert burden falls with them.
Among 22,102 patients followed across nine 30-day periods from their first alert, mean alert days per patient fell 48% and the share of the cohort alerting fell from 53.3% to 32.4%. 77% of that decline reflects patients leaving the alerting state entirely rather than alerting less often. The curve plateaus rather than decaying to zero — about a third of the cohort is still surfacing events at nine months, which is what a chronic surveillance need looks like in data.
The alert nobody counts: more patients alerted for blood pressure that ran too low (10,082) than too high (8,459), and at least 1,610 triggered both. Continuous measurement is therefore also the routine safeguard against over-treatment and fall risk in older adults — a trade-off that is real, common, and observable the day it appears.
Cardiovascular risk
−15.5%Where this number comes fromPopulationmodeled projection from a sustained 8 mmHg reductionSourceConservative anchor per the Chief Scientific OfficerVerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
relative reduction in major cardiovascular events, modeled projection from a sustained 8 mmHg reduction
0.4 mmHgWhere this number comes fromPopulation3,399 matched pairsSourceAHA Scientific SessionsVerifiedAugust 2026Observational and single-arm — reported as an association, not causation.
home-versus-office agreement, 3,399 matched pairs
Modeled projection from randomized-trial hazard ratios — not an outcome measured in the HealthSnap population. An individual participant-level meta-analysis of 48 randomized trials and 344,716 participants associates each 5 mmHg of systolic reduction with roughly a 10% lower risk of major cardiovascular events. Applied conservatively to a sustained 8 mmHg reduction, that corresponds to an estimated 15.5% relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events.
Methods & limitations
Our platform analyses are observational and single-arm, without a concurrent control group or adjustment for medication changes. We report associations, not causation. Severity bands come from transmitted device readings rather than diagnosis codes. Where regression toward the mean could inflate a result, we say so and stratify to test it.
Our published studies are co-authored with independent health-system investigators; HealthSnap authors are employees and equity holders, and disclose it.
Two specific limits worth stating plainly. The 30-day readmission result was −16.0% and did not reach significance (p = 0.131), so it is not presented as a finding anywhere on this site. And the cardiovascular-risk projection is a model, not a measurement.
Reports
Read the full evidence binder, as submitted to CMS.
Patient clinical outcomes, cardiology clinical outcomes, the in-office blood-pressure validation findings, and the cost-savings and utilization findings.
Read it with our Chief Scientific Officer.
Bring the methodological questions. That is the conversation we want.