Category: Texas

Rider 32: What it means for Texas Home Health Agencies.

What Rider 32 Means for Home Health Agencies Delivering Telemonitoring in Texas

by Judah Coody, posted in RCM, Texas
Rider 32: What it means for Texas Home Health Agencies.

What Rider 32 Means for Home Health Agencies Delivering Telemonitoring in Texas

  • Judah Coody

    Judah is the Marketing Lead at Medical Office Force. He specializes in new technology growth and on practical insights that help clinics succeed in a rapidly changing healthcare landscape.

Reviewed by: Dr. Subodh K. Agrawal, MD, FACC

Medical Director, Medical Office Force LLC | Athens, Georgia

Alumnus: SMS Medical College, Emory University, University of Alabama at Birmingham

If your home health agency provides telemonitoring (Remote Patient Monitoring or RPM) to Texas Medicaid patients, you have likely seen Rider 32 mentioned in provider updates, MCO communications, or HHSC notices. Many agencies are still working to understand what changed, which patients are affected, and how billing workflows now differ for dual-eligible members.

This guide explains Rider 32 in straightforward terms, focusing specifically on what Texas home health agencies need to know when managing telemonitoring services.

Summary

Rider 32 is a budget instruction from the Texas Legislature that changed how certain Medicaid claims are processed for dual-eligible patients (people who have both Medicare and Medicaid). Effective September 1, 2025, home health agencies can no longer bill these claims to traditional fee-for-service Medicaid through TMHP. Instead, those claims now go directly to the patient’s Medicaid Managed Care Organization (MCO), such as Superior HealthPlan, Community First, BCBSTX, UnitedHealthcare, Texas Children’s Health Plan, and others.

For telemonitoring specifically, this means the workflow you used for years to get paid for procedure code S9110 on dual-eligible patients no longer works the same way. Same service. Different payer. Different rules.

A Quick Refresher on Texas Medicaid Telemonitoring

Before we go deeper, here is a quick refresher on the benefit itself.

In Texas, home telemonitoring (synonymous with remote patient monitoring) is a covered Medicaid service for patients who meet specific clinical criteria, such as a diagnosis of diabetes or hypertension along with at least one risk factor (recent hospitalization, history of poor glycemic control, and so on). Pediatric patients aged 20 and under may also qualify under different criteria.

Home health agencies bill telemonitoring using procedure code S9110 with revenue code 780. The initial setup and equipment installation use S9110 with the U1 modifier. Prior authorization is required, and approvals are typically given for up to 90 days at a time. Agencies must establish a plan of care with measurable outcomes, share clinical data with the ordering physician, and report back at least once a month, or sooner if a patient’s readings fall outside the parameters set by the doctor.

This benefit has been growing steadily since the legislature made many telehealth and telemonitoring expansions permanent through House Bill 4 in 2021, and it expanded again in September 2024 to allow FQHCs and RHCs to bill telemonitoring (using G0511 instead of S9110). In short: it is a strong, established benefit, and demand is growing.

Rider 32 does not change the clinical rules for who qualifies or how you deliver the service. It changes the payment rails for one specific group of patients.

What Rider 32 Actually Does

Rider 32 was passed as part of the 2024–2025 General Appropriations Act (House Bill 1, 88th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2023, Article II, HHSC, Rider 32). The legislature instructed HHSC to move “Medicaid-only acute care services” for dual-eligible managed care members out of fee-for-service and into managed care.

Here is what that means in practice.

A dual-eligible patient has both Medicare and Medicaid. For most of their care, Medicare pays first, and Medicaid covers what Medicare does not, like the patient’s deductibles, coinsurance, and a handful of services Medicare simply does not cover. These “Medicaid wrap-around” services are the ones Rider 32 focuses on.

Before September 1, 2025, when a home health agency provided one of these Medicaid-only services to a dual-eligible patient, the agency billed traditional fee-for-service Medicaid through TMHP, even if the patient was enrolled in a Medicaid MCO for their long-term care services.

Now those claims go directly to the patient’s Medicaid MCO, just like claims for Medicaid-only members already do.

HHSC’s reasoning is straightforward: a dual-eligible patient enrolled in a STAR+PLUS or other managed care plan should have all of their Medicaid services coordinated through one entity, not split between an MCO and FFS. It is meant to streamline coordination and improve oversight.

For your agency, however, it means new processes, new payer relationships, and new places where things can go wrong.

What This Means for Your Telemonitoring Program

Here is the specific impact on home health agencies running telemonitoring services.

      1. Identify your dual-eligible telemonitoring patients. Not every Medicaid patient is dual-eligible, and not every dual-eligible is enrolled in an MCO. You need a clean way to flag patients who fall into the Rider 32 bucket. Their Medicaid ID, eligibility file, and MCO assignment all matter for billing.
      2. Bill the MCO, not TMHP. Telemonitoring claims (S9110 with revenue code 780) for these patients now go to the patient’s Medicaid MCO. If your billing team accidentally submits to TMHP, HHSC’s FFS claims administrator will forward those claims to the appropriate MCO during the transition, but you should not rely on that as a long-term workflow. The cleaner the front-end, the faster you get paid.
      3. Re-check prior authorization rules per MCO. This is where many agencies get tripped up. Each MCO has its own prior authorization rules, forms, portals, and timelines. They may differ from FFS Medicaid requirements. The 90-day prior authorization you got under FFS does not automatically transfer. After the initial 90-day continuity-of-care period, services that previously bypassed authorization must obtain prior auth from the MCO, or claims may be denied.
      4. Confirm network status. If your agency is out-of-network with a particular MCO, you may need to either join the network or transition the patient to an in-network provider before the continuity-of-care window ends. Out-of-network providers will need prior authorization to keep serving the member.
      5. EVV still applies. For telemonitoring services that require Electronic Visit Verification, providers still submit EVV claims to TMHP for matching, but TMHP no longer pays them. TMHP forwards the matched claims to the MCO for adjudication. So you have two systems to reconcile: EVV match status with TMHP, and payment status with the MCO.
      6. Update your authorizations in your EVV system. Authorizations that moved from TMHP to an MCO need to be updated in the EVV system, or your EVV matches will fail.

Why This Matters for Telemonitoring Specifically

Telemonitoring is a recurring monthly service. Unlike a one-time visit, you are submitting claims month after month for the same patient over a 90-day authorization period, then renewing. That recurring billing pattern means a small misconfiguration, like sending claims to the wrong payer or missing a prior auth renewal under new MCO rules, can compound across dozens or hundreds of patients before anyone notices.

Telemonitoring also has a unique documentation burden. You need at least 16 days of data collection per month for FQHCs and RHCs billing G0511, and home health agencies must hit their plan-of-care reporting requirements regardless of payer. If your software is not tracking which patient belongs to which payer, which prior auth is expiring under which MCO, and which claim has gone out where, the operational complexity will eat your margin.

How Software Can Help You Stay Ahead

This is exactly the kind of change where good software earns its keep. A modern RPM and telemonitoring platform should:

  • Flag dual-eligible Medicaid patients automatically based on eligibility data and route their claims to the right MCO.
  • Track prior authorizations by payer, so renewals are triggered well before the 90-day window expires.
  • Map S9110, revenue code 780, U1 modifiers, and EVV requirements correctly per payer, so your billers do not have to memorize who wants what.
  • Surface clean reports on missed reading days, plan-of-care reviews, and physician reporting events, so compliance is documented automatically rather than reconstructed at audit time.
  • Reconcile EVV match results from TMHP with claim status from the MCO, since those now live in two different places.

If your team is still managing this in spreadsheets, a payer change like Rider 32 is the kind of event that quietly creates weeks of denied claims, lost revenue, and frustrated staff before anyone realizes what happened.

Texas Rider 32: Frequently Asked Questions

    1. What exactly is Rider 32?

Rider 32 is a budget instruction from the Texas Legislature that moves “Medicaid-only acute care services” for dual-eligible members (those with both Medicare and Medicaid) from traditional fee-for-service (TMHP) into Managed Care Organizations (MCOs).

    1. When does this change take effect for telemonitoring services?

The transition officially became effective on September 1, 2025. Home health agencies should have updated their billing workflows by this date to ensure claims reach the correct payer.

    1. Does Rider 32 change the clinical eligibility for telemonitoring?

No. The clinical requirements remain the same. Patients still qualify based on diagnoses like diabetes or hypertension with specific risk factors, and the documentation requirements for physician reporting and plan-of-care outcomes have not changed.

    1. Which patients are affected by this change?

Rider 32 specifically impacts dual-eligible patients enrolled in a Medicaid Managed Care plan (such as STAR+PLUS). Medicaid-only patients or those not in an MCO are not affected by this specific shift in payment rails.

    1. Where do I send my S9110 claims now?

Instead of billing traditional fee-for-service through TMHP, you must now submit claims for dual-eligible managed care members directly to their assigned MCO (e.g., Superior HealthPlan, UnitedHealthcare, Community First, etc.).

    1. Will my existing prior authorizations transfer to the MCO automatically?

While there is an initial 90-day “continuity-of-care” period, authorizations do not permanently transfer. After this window, you must obtain a new prior authorization directly from the patient’s MCO according to their specific forms and portals.

    1. How does Rider 32 affect Electronic Visit Verification (EVV)?

The process is split: you still submit EVV claims to TMHP for matching, but TMHP no longer pays the claim. Once matched, TMHP forwards the claim to the MCO for payment. You must reconcile the match status at TMHP and the payment status at the MCO.

    1. What happens if I accidentally bill TMHP for a dual-eligible patient?

During the transition period, TMHP may forward these claims to the correct MCO. However, this is not a permanent solution and can lead to significant payment delays. You should update your internal systems to route these claims correctly from the start.

    1. Do I need to be in-network with the MCO to get paid?

Yes. If you are out-of-network, you may need to join the MCO’s provider network or transition the patient to an in-network provider before the continuity-of-care window expires to avoid claim denials.

    1. Why is this change particularly risky for telemonitoring programs?

Because telemonitoring is a recurring monthly service (code S9110), a single billing error or an expired authorization can lead to a “domino effect” of denials across several months of service before the error is caught, creating a significant loss in revenue.

Bottom Line

Rider 32 did not change Texas Medicaid telemonitoring as a benefit. The clinical criteria, the codes, the documentation requirements, and the patient population all stayed the same. What changed is who you bill, how you get authorization, and how your administrative systems need to be set up for dual-eligible managed care patients.

For home health agencies serving Medicaid populations, this is the moment to audit your telemonitoring billing workflow, identify your dual-eligible patients, confirm your MCO network status, and make sure your software is doing the heavy lifting on payer routing, authorizations, and EVV reconciliation. The agencies that get ahead of this transition will keep cash flowing smoothly. The ones that wait are likely to spend the next year cleaning up denials.

If you have questions about how Medical Office Force supports your RPM and telemonitoring billing under Rider 32, we are happy to walk you through it.

The Physician-HHA Symbiosis: How Smart RPM Billing Secures Home Health Agency’s Referral Pipeline

by Judah Coody, posted in RCM, Texas

The Physician-HHA Symbiosis: How Smart RPM Billing Secures Home Health Agency’s Referral Pipeline

  • Judah Coody

    Judah is the Marketing Lead at Medical Office Force. He specializes in new technology growth and on practical insights that help clinics succeed in a rapidly changing healthcare landscape.

In the competitive landscape of Texas Home Health, your agency’s survival depends on two things: TMHP compliance and Physician loyalty.

In 2026, the “U-Modifier” system has transformed Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) from a simple clinical tool into a complex financial engine. If your EHR vendor is still treating RPM as an afterthought, you aren’t just risking a TMHP audit, you are losing the trust of your referring physicians.

Why RPM Billing Now Impacts Physician Referral Pipelines

Referral relationships are built on reliability.

Physicians want to refer patients to agencies that:

• Maintain compliant documentation
• Submit clean claims
• Reduce administrative burden
• Support coordinated care management
• Deliver transparent monitoring reports

When RPM billing is handled correctly, physicians experience fewer delays, cleaner documentation, and stronger care visibility.

When RPM billing becomes inconsistent, physicians may lose confidence in the agency’s ability to manage long-term patient oversight.

This is why RPM compliance is no longer only a billing function, it has become part of physician relationship management.

The New Texas RPM Billing Gold Standard: S9110 and the U-Modifier

In Texas, the old 16-day monitoring rule has been replaced by a more flexible, yet more data-intensive, tiered system. Agencies must now use Procedure Code S9110 with Revenue Code 780. The reimbursement is defined by the number of days of “cellular input” captured, which dictates which U-Modifier (U2 through U9) must be appended to the claim.

But there is a catch: While the Home Health Agency (HHA) focuses on S9110, the supervising physician is often eligible to bill for their oversight time. If your systems don’t talk to each other, both of you lose.

Understanding the U‑Modifier Framework

Each modifier reflects a different monitoring threshold.

For example:

Modifier RPM Activity Level Operational Meaning
U1 Setup Patient onboarding
U2–U4 Low monitoring Partial transmission
U5–U8 Moderate monitoring Consistent engagement
U9 Full threshold Maximum reimbursement tier

This means agencies must accurately track:

  • • Device setup date
  • •  Patient onboarding documentation
  • •  Daily monitoring transmissions
  • •  Billing windows
  • •  Physician orders
  • •  Prior Authorization linkage

Without automation or structured workflows, errors become more likely.

5-Question Self-Assessment: Is Your Vendor "U-Modifier" Ready?

  1. 1. Automated Tiering: Does the system automatically calculate the “Rolling Month” and append the correct U-modifier based on daily cellular transmissions?
  2.  
  3. 2. Initial Setup: Can you prove the “U1” modifier (Initial Setup) by showing a time-stamped patient education log within the EHR?
  4.  
  5. 3. Physician Portals: Does your vendor provide a “Billing Support Packet” that the supervising physician can use to justify their own oversight billing (CPT 99457/99458)?
  6.  
  7. 4. Direct TMHP Link: Does your software have a direct Submitter ID for batch EDI transmission, or are you manually uploading modifiers to a portal?

5. Threshold Alerts: Does the system alert you if a patient is one day away from a higher-paying U-modifier tier, allowing for a compliance check?

10 FAQs: Mastering TMHP RPM & U-Modifier Workflow

  1. 1. What is the U-Modifier system in Texas Medicaid?

It is a tiered reimbursement model for code S9110. Different modifiers (U2-U9) represent different ranges of days that the patient successfully transmitted data via a cellular device.

  1. 2. Is there still a 16-day requirement?

For Texas Medicaid HHAs using S9110, the 16-day rule is replaced by the U-modifier tiers. However, 16 days remains the threshold for Medicare-based RPM codes like 99454.

  1. 3. What is the “U1” modifier?

U1 is used for the initial setup and patient education. It is a one-time charge per episode of care and requires documented proof of training.

  1. 4. Why is “Cellular Input” required?

TMHP requires proof of transmission. Cellular devices (unlike Bluetooth) sync directly to the EHR, creating an automated, audit-proof log of the days the device was used.

  1. 5. How does the system handle Prior Authorization (PA)?

Your Practice Management system must link the PA number directly to the 837P claim file. If the PA is missing or expired, the system should “hard stop” the claim before transmission.

  1. 6. Can the HHA and Physician both bill for RPM?

Yes. The HHA bills S9110 (and U-modifiers) for the equipment and monitoring, while the physician bills CPT codes like 99457 for clinical decision-making.

  1. 7. What is a “Billing Support Packet”?

This is a monthly report generated by your EHR that summarizes the patient’s vitals, alerts, and nurse interventions. You provide this to the physician so they have the documentation needed to bill their oversight codes.

  1. 8. How do we handle batch transmissions to MCOs?

Your vendor must use an EDI clearinghouse that recognizes the S9110/U-modifier logic for Texas-specific MCOs like Superior, Molina, and UnitedHealthcare.

  1. 9. What is a “Rolling Month”?

Billing for S9110 is based on a 30-day window starting from the date of the first transmission, not necessarily the first of the calendar month.

  1. 10. What happens if the physician doesn’t sign the order?

The claim is invalid. Your EHR must feature an “Order Tracking” dashboard that prevents any RPM billing until the signed physician order is electronically captured and filed.

The Eye-Opener: The Symbiosis Strategy

The most successful Texas HHAs in 2026 aren’t just “monitoring patients”; they are empowering physicians. By using a Practice Management system that automates the U-modifier logic and provides the physician with an “audit-ready” billing packet, you become an indispensable partner.

When you make the physician’s billing easy, your referral pipeline stays full.

Texas-Home-Health-Medicaid-RPM-Growth-Roadmap

How Texas Home Health Agencies Master Medicaid RPM: A Roadmap to Program Growth

by Chris Dillon, posted in RCM, Texas
Texas-Home-Health-Medicaid-RPM-Growth-Roadmap

How Texas Home Health Agencies Master Medicaid RPM: A Roadmap to Program Growth

  • Medical Sales Director | Community Health Educator | Wellness Innovator

The healthcare delivery landscape in the Lone Star State is undergoing a monumental shift. As Texas navigates a transformative era for digital health, Home Health Agencies (HHAs) in cities like Houston, Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin are no longer just providers of traditional in-home care – they have become the clinical anchors of a 24/7 digital safety net. Driven by landmark legislation like House Bill 2727, the integration of Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) into Texas Medicaid has proven to be a powerhouse for improving patient outcomes, securing a massive Return on Investment (ROI), and stabilizing the state’s most vulnerable “poor and sick” populations.1

For Texas HHAs, the transition from periodic visits to continuous physiologic oversight is not just a clinical upgrade; it is a fiscal necessity. By leveraging advanced partnerships with digital health leaders like Medical Office Force, agencies are delivering high-quality, low-cost care that is effectively “OIG audit-proof.”

Care Without vs. With RPM: The Data-Driven Choice

To understand why RPM is the definitive strategy for Texas Medicaid, we must look at the stark contrast between traditional care and the RPM-enabled model. Data from recent clinical white papers and state evaluations reveals that the “standard” episodic approach often leaves high-risk patients in a cycle of crisis, while RPM provides a proactive shield.

Performance Metric Standard Care (Without RPM) RPM-Enabled Care (With RPM)
30-Day Readmission Rate (CHF) 23.0% (National Avg) 6.0%
30-Day Readmission (All Cause) 41.0% 11.0%
Emergency Department (ED) Visits 0.48 visits per patient 0.06 visits per patient
Annual Cost of Care $7M - $8M (Per panel) $3M (Per panel)
Net Health Stability Improvement 70.4% 77.2%
Hospital Admissions 1.38 per patient/year 0.57 per patient/year

The data is clear: patients monitored via RPM are 76% less likely to experience a hospital readmission.3 By spotting worsening vitals sooner – such as a 10/8 mmHg blood pressure spike or glucose instability – HHAs can intervene before a patient requires emergency stabilization.

The Data: Proven Success in the Lone Star State

The impact of the Texas RPM model is substantiated by rigorous clinical outcomes. Proactive monitoring is now recognized as the ultimate weapon against “potentially preventable events” (PPEs) in the Texas Medicaid program.11

      • ED Visit Reductions: High-risk cohorts in Texas utilizing RPM have seen a staggering 87% reduction in emergency department visits over a three-month period.7
      • Capacity Impact: In South Texas, the University Health “Hospital at Home” program transferred 2,502 patients to home monitoring, opening up 13,080 bed days for higher-acuity patients .
      • Biometric Stability: Diabetic patients in Texas programs have achieved average blood glucose improvements of 27 mg/dL.

The ROI: A Fiscal Blueprint for HHAs

The economic argument for Texas Medicaid RPM is ironclad. While the direct cost to monitor a patient 24/7 is approximately $2,160 annually, the savings generated by avoiding even a single CHF admission (averaging $34,000) are immense.

On a per-patient basis, RPM results in a net savings of $5,034 per year compared to standard care without RPM. Systematic reviews of these programs report an average ROI of 22.2%, which can surge to 93.3% under optimized conditions where patient adherence is high and administrative overhead is minimized via automated solutions.

Partnering with Medical Office Force for Efficiency

To capture this ROI, HHAs must eliminate administrative “revenue leakage.” Partnering with a digital health company like Medical Office Force (MOF) allows agencies to:

      1. Reduce Admin Time by 53%: Utilizing AI Voice Agents for intake and insurance verification ensures that clinical staff focus on patients, not paperwork.17
      2. Harmonize RCM and Clinical Data: By integrating clinical alerts directly with the revenue cycle, every billable minute and data point is captured and substantiated for reimbursement.19
      3. Ensure Regulatory Precision: Using “Compliance-as-Code” engines to block red-flag billing patterns before they are submitted, protecting your agency from OIG scrutiny .

5 Questions a Texas HHA Should Ask to Start the Medicaid RPM Program

      1. Does our agency have the clinical bandwidth for 24/7 data monitoring and emergency triage? Texas Medicaid rules (TAC § 354.1434) mandate that providers be available around the clock to respond to alerts and escalate to physicians .
      2. Is our IT and billing infrastructure natively capable of tracking the new 2026 thresholds? With the addition of CPT 99470 (10–19 minutes) and CPT 99445 (2–15 days), manual tracking is a major audit risk .
      3. How will we mitigate the “Digital Divide” for our low-income recipients? Successful Texas HHAs deploy “plug-and-play” cellular devices that bypass the need for patient-owned Wi-Fi .
      4. Have we established a formalized protocol for Plan of Care sharing? You must share clinical information and outcome measures with the prescribing physician at least once per month to remain compliant .
      5. What is our strategy for maintaining audit-ready evidence artifacts? To survive an OIG audit (Audit ID: OAS-25-05-008), you must produce a reasoning trace for every claim, including timestamps and device IDs .

10 FAQ: Ensuring Compliance and OIG Audit-Proofing

    1. Who is eligible for the Texas Medicaid RPM program?

Recipients diagnosed with diabetes or hypertension who exhibit at least one qualifying risk factor (e.g., two+ hospitalizations in 12 months, frequent ER visits, or a documented risk of falls) are eligible .

    1. How does a physician recognize the need and order the service?

A physician identifies the need for continuous tracking between visits and signs a formal order for telemonitoring, approving a specific Plan of Care with vital sign parameters .

    1. Is “home telemonitoring” the same as Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM)?

Yes. As of September 2024, the Texas HHSC officially confirmed that the term “home telemonitoring service” is synonymous with “remote patient monitoring” (RPM) .

    1. Can patients self-report their physiologic data for billing?

No. Data must be electronically collected and automatically uploaded by an FDA-defined medical device. Manual logs are not sufficient for RPM billing .

    1. What are the specific 2026 codes for “short-term” monitoring?

The 2026 framework adds CPT 99445 for 2–15 measurement days and CPT 99470 for the first 10–19 minutes of treatment management .

    1. Do I need to report patient data if all readings are normal?

Yes. Scheduled periodic reporting to the physician is legally required at least once per calendar month, even if all readings were within normal range .

    1. How can I ensure my program is “OIG audit-proof”?

Avoid “RPM mills” by ensuring a prior relationship between the patient and physician. Use technology that provides an automated audit trail of all transmissions and interactions .

    1. What is the protocol for abnormal readings?

An RN, CNS, or PA must review the data immediately and escalate the alert to the prescribing physician if vitals fall outside established safe parameters .

    1. Can RPM and Chronic Care Management (CCM) be billed together?

Yes, they are complementary. However, the time spent on each must be separate and distinct; minutes cannot be “double-counted” .

    1. Does a patient need high-speed internet to participate?

No. HHAs are responsible for providing equipment, which typically involves cellular-connected monitors that transmit data without a home Wi-Fi connection .

References

  • medicalofficeforce.com – Texas Medicaid RPM Guide 2026.
  • 1 Tex. Admin. Code § 354.1434 – Home Telemonitoring Benefits and Limitations.
  • docsink.com – RPM ROI and Stability Data: With vs. Without.
  • thepermanentejournal.org – Readmission Reduction Statistics: Enrolled vs. Non-Enrolled.
  • fairpath.ai – OIG 2026 RPM Audit Practice Guide (ID: OAS-25-05-008).
  • firstnet.com – CHF Readmission Pilot: 6% vs. 23% National Average.
  • accuhealth.tech – ACOs & RPM White Paper: $3M vs. $7M Cost Comparison.
  • candihealth.com – 2026 RPM CPT Code Update 99445/99470.
  • pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov – Efficacy of Remote Health Monitoring in ED Visit Reduction.
  • medicalofficeforce.com – Texas Medicaid RPM Operational Steps and Compliance FAQs.

Works cited

  1. Grow Your Home Health Agency with RPM | Audit-Proof Operations, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.medicalofficeforce.com/texas-medicaid-rpm-guide-2026/
  2. Remote Patient Monitoring Still a Priority for Federal Officials – Texas Medical Association, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=67184
  3. Effect of remote patient monitoring on healthcare use among patients with cancer: A systematic review – PMC, accessed April 22, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12515290/
  4. 88(R) HB 2727 – Committee Report (Substituted) version – Bill Analysis, accessed April 22, 2026, https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/analysis/html/HB02727H.htm
  5. Texas Administrative Code, Subchapter A, Division 33 – ADVANCED TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES – Justia Regulations, accessed April 22, 2026, https://regulations.justia.com/states/texas/title-1/part-15/chapter-354/subchapter-a/division-33/
  6. Case Study: Determining whether Remote Patient Monitoring can reduce 30-day Readmission Rates for Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) – FirstNet, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.firstnet.com/content/dam/firstnet/white-papers/remote-patient-monitoring-case-study.pdf
  7. 1 Tex. Admin. Code § 354.1434 – Home Telemonitoring Benefits and Limitations, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/texas/1-Tex-Admin-Code-SS-354-1434
  8. Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) & Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM) – Accuhealth, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.accuhealth.tech/hubfs/ACOs%20&%20RPM%20White%20Paper%202021.pdf
  9. The Impact of RPM on Patient Outcomes – Accuhealth, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.accuhealth.tech/blog/the-impact-of-rpm-on-patient-outcomes
  10. Transformation of Healthcare with Digital Solutions like RPM and CCM, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.medicalofficeforce.com/transformation-of-healthcare-with-digital-solutions-like-rpm-and-ccm/
  11. Telemedicine, Teledentistry, Telehealth, and Home Telemonitoring …, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.hhs.texas.gov/sites/default/files/documents/telehealth-services-texas-medicaid-report-2024.pdf
  12. HB2727 | Texas 2023-2024 | Relating to the provision of home telemonitoring services under Medicaid. – Legislative Tracking | PolicyEngage, accessed April 22, 2026, https://trackbill.com/bill/texas-house-bill-2727-relating-to-the-provision-of-home-telemonitoring-services-under-medicaid/2379363/
  13. Efficacy of Remote Health Monitoring in Reducing Hospital Readmissions Among High-Risk Postdischarge Patients: Prospective Cohort Study – PMC, accessed April 22, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11437225/
  14. Home Telemonitoring Benefits for Texas Medicaid Will Change, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.texaschildrenshealthplan.org/news/provider-alert/home-telemonitoring-benefits-texas-medicaid-will-change
  15. RPM: Lowering Hospital Readmissions, Improving Outcomes – DocsInk, accessed April 22, 2026, https://docsink.com/lowering-hospital-readmissions-improving-outcome/
  16. Announcements – Telehealth and Medicine Today, accessed April 22, 2026, https://telehealthandmedicinetoday.com/index.php/journal/announcement
  17. Safe, controlled and explainable AI, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.intelligencefactory.ai/
  18. Healthcare Tips & Updates – Medical Office Force Blog, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.medicalofficeforce.com/blog/
  19. Remote Patient Monitoring Services – Medical Office Force, accessed April 22, 2026, https://www.medicalofficeforce.com/remote-patient-monitoring/
  20. The OIG’s 2026 RPM Audit is Scheduled: Are You Ready? | FairPath Practice Guide, accessed April 22, 2026, https://fairpath.ai/resources/oig-2026-rpm-audit-practice-guide

2026 Remote Patient Monitoring CPT Codes: What’s New – CandiHealth, accessed April 22, 2026, https://candihealth.com/2026-remote-patient-monitoring-cpt-codes-whats-new/