New telemedicine studies published in 2025 and 2026 give care teams a clearer view of what virtual care does well. These telemedicine studies cover blood pressure control, primary care quality, device standards, and environmental impact. The research is larger than the early pandemic-era work. Several studies followed patients for two years or more.
This article reviews four areas of recent research. Each section explains what the study found and what it means for providers, practices, and care teams. Many of these teams run remote patient monitoring (RPM) programs and follow telehealth news closely.
Study #1: Remote Monitoring Improves Blood Pressure Over 24 Months
Among new telemedicine studies on chronic care, a 2025 randomized controlled trial in BMC Medicine stands out. Researchers followed 1,006 patients with hypertension for 24 months. Each patient was assigned to remote monitoring, self-monitoring, or usual care.
The remote monitoring group used a cloud-based system. Physicians received alerts when readings fell outside set ranges. The self-monitoring group logged readings on their own, with no remote feedback. The usual care group received routine clinical management.
What the Researchers Found
Remote monitoring lowered systolic blood pressure by 2.7 mm Hg more than usual care. The difference was statistically significant. Patients in the remote group who started with uncontrolled blood pressure saw a much larger drop. Their systolic pressure fell by 17.7 mm Hg. Self-monitoring alone did not improve control compared with usual care.
The gains came from the care team loop. When clinicians reviewed readings and followed up, blood pressure improved. Patients who tracked readings without that feedback did not see the same results. Two years is also a long window for a monitoring trial. It suggests the benefit holds when programs stay consistent.
For more on building this type of program, see our guide to remote patient monitoring for hypertension.
Study #2: Telehealth and Primary Care Quality in the VHA
A February 2026 cohort study in JAMA Network Open looked at 744,599 veterans in Veterans Health Administration primary care. It ranks among the largest telemedicine studies to date on visit mix and care quality. Researchers grouped patients by the share of primary care they received through telephone or video visits.
What the Researchers Found
Veterans with low or intermediate telehealth use had outcomes similar to patients seen only in person. This held for most measures, including cardiovascular and behavioral health. Patients who received 50% or more of their primary care remotely scored lower on several measures. These included influenza vaccination, statin adherence, and depression screening.
An earlier 2025 VHA study in the same journal reviewed 71,508 veterans. Veterans who received more care from a national telehealth staffing program were more likely to improve blood pressure control.
The strongest quality results came from a blend of virtual and in-person care. Some services need a hands-on visit, such as vaccines. Others, like blood pressure follow-up, work well through primary care telemedicine.
Remote monitoring fits naturally into this hybrid model. It gives clinicians steady data between visits. In-person time can then focus on exams, vaccines, and preventive screenings.
Study #3: The Carbon Footprint of Telemedicine
The first version of this article covered a bariatric surgery study on telemedicine and carbon emissions. Newer research has expanded that work to millions of visits.
A systematic review of 48 studies analyzed more than 68 million telemedicine consultations. The authors estimated savings of 691,825 tons of CO2 emissions. Patients also avoided more than 3.3 billion kilometers of travel. The review found that emissions from telemedicine technology were small compared with the travel it replaced.
U.S. Estimates on Patient Travel
Patient travel drives most of this impact. A 2025 study in JAMA Network Open estimated that U.S. patient travel for health care produces about 35.7 megatons of CO2 equivalent each year.
A 2024 national analysis in the Journal of Medical Internet Research looked at telemedicine directly. It found a median savings of 20 kg of CO2 per telemedicine session. For 2021 and 2022, the authors estimated annual U.S. savings of about 1.4 million metric tons. A widely cited earlier analysis estimated that health care produced about 10% of U.S. CO2 emissions in 2013.
Fewer trips help patients as well as the environment. Travel costs time, fuel, and missed work. Patients in rural areas often drive long distances for routine checks. Remote monitoring lets many of those checks happen at home.
For some conditions, home monitoring also supports fewer hospital stays. Our article on heart failure remote monitoring covers the research on readmissions.
Study #4: New Guideline Standards for Home Monitoring Devices
The first version of this article reviewed telemedicine devices developed between 2012 and 2022. Those included digital stethoscopes, telepresence robots, and robotic ultrasound systems. Device research has since shifted toward accuracy and daily use at home.
The 2025 AHA/ACC high blood pressure guideline replaced the 2017 version. It supports home blood pressure monitoring with validated, cuff-based devices. Clinicians can use these readings to confirm a diagnosis and track treatment. The guideline does not recommend cuffless devices, such as smartwatches, for diagnosing or managing high blood pressure. It also keeps a treatment target below 130/80 mm Hg for most adults.
Connectivity and Ease of Use
Accuracy is one part of device selection. Patients also need devices that send readings without extra steps.
Cellular devices transmit readings on their own. There is no smartphone or app pairing, which helps patients who are less comfortable with technology. Bluetooth devices can connect through a cellular hub like the Tenovi Gateway. This setup lets one patient use several devices, such as a blood pressure monitor, scale, and pulse oximeter. Our overview of top remote patient monitoring devices in 2026 compares the options.
Key Takeaways From New Telemedicine Studies
- Clinician review drives results. Remote monitoring with follow-up outperformed self-monitoring alone in a two-year trial.
- Consistent programs show lasting effects. Blood pressure gains held across 24 months of remote monitoring.
- Hybrid care supports quality. Low and moderate telehealth use matched in-person care on most measures.
- Some services still need a visit. Vaccines and certain screenings benefit from in-person time.
- Device accuracy matters. The 2025 guideline favors validated, cuff-based blood pressure monitors for home use.
- Less travel lowers emissions. Telemedicine reduces transport-related carbon output across millions of visits.
Frequently Asked Questions About New Telemedicine Studies
This section provides answers to questions you may find helpful to better understand the telemedicine studies outlined in the preceding article.
1) What do new telemedicine studies show about blood pressure control?
A 2025 randomized trial of 1,006 patients found that remote monitoring lowered systolic blood pressure more than usual care. Patients with uncontrolled blood pressure at the start saw the largest improvement. Self-monitoring without clinician feedback did not produce the same results.
2) Is telehealth as effective as in-person primary care?
For most patients, a mix works well. A 2026 study of 744,599 veterans found that low and intermediate telehealth use matched in-person care on most quality measures. Patients who used telehealth for half or more of their visits had lower rates of vaccination and some screenings.
3) How does telemedicine reduce carbon emissions?
Telemedicine reduces patient travel, which is the main source of savings. One review of more than 68 million consultations estimated savings of 691,825 tons of CO2. The technology itself uses very little energy compared with the trips it replaces.
4) Are smartwatches accurate enough for blood pressure monitoring?
The 2025 AHA/ACC guideline does not recommend smartwatches or other cuffless devices for diagnosing or managing high blood pressure. It supports home monitoring with validated, cuff-based devices. Patients should ask their care team which monitor to use.
5) What is the difference between telemedicine and remote patient monitoring?
Telemedicine is a broad term for care delivered at a distance, such as video or phone visits. Remote patient monitoring is one form of it. RPM uses connected devices to send health readings from home to a care team for review.
6) How can practices apply findings from recent telemedicine studies?
Practices can pair home monitoring with regular clinician review and follow-up. They can keep in-person visits for exams, vaccines, and screenings. Choosing validated devices that transmit readings automatically can also support patient adherence.
Understanding New Telemedicine Studies
New telemedicine studies from 2025 and 2026 point in a consistent direction. Remote physiological monitoring works best when clinicians review readings and act on them. A blend of virtual and in-person care supports quality across most measures. Validated, cuff-based devices remain the standard for home blood pressure monitoring. Reduced patient travel also lowers health care emissions at a national scale. Together, these telemedicine studies support care models that keep patients connected to their care teams between visits.
Tenovi provides cellular-connected devices and infrastructure for remote patient monitoring and remote therapeutic monitoring (RTM) programs. We work with RPM software companies, chronic care management companies, telehealth platforms, health systems, payers, and pharmacies. Our standalone cellular devices send readings on their own, and our Bluetooth devices connect through the Tenovi Cellular Gateway. Contact us for a free demo and consultation to see how Tenovi can support your monitoring program.
This material is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, compliance, billing, coding, or reimbursement advice. CPT® codes, descriptions, and Medicare payment rates referenced here are drawn from publicly available sources, are subject to change, and may vary by payer, locality, and patient circumstances. Tenovi makes no representation or guarantee regarding coverage, payment, or the appropriateness of any code for a particular patient or service, and any presented are illustrative only. Providers are solely responsible for independently determining medical necessity and applicable coding, coverage, documentation, and billing requirements and for submitting accurate claims. Consult applicable payer guidance and qualified billing, coding, compliance, or legal professionals before making billing decisions. CPT® is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association.
