Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories Market Emerging Trends, Business Enlargement Plans Forecast 2020-2026

The MarketWatch News Department was not involved in the creation of this content.

Dec 04, 2020 (Market Insight Reports) —
A recent report provides crucial insights along with application based and forecast information in the Global Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories Market. The report provides a comprehensive analysis of key factors that are expected to drive the growth of this market. This study also provides a detailed overview of the opportunities along with the current trends observed in the Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories market.

With increasing cases of obesity all over the globe, a need for conducting an in-depth study about this healthcare issue led to the development of this report. Increasing binge eating and consumption of junk foods, neglect towards regular exercise, rising levels of stress, are key market drivers. The report discusses more information about these subjects, with a focus on the rising need for Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories.

Download Sample –

A quantitative analysis of the industry is compiled for a period of 10 years in order to assist players to grow in the market. Insights on specific revenue figures generated are also given in the report, along with projected revenue at the end of the forecast period. With healthcare being a sensitive topic, a separate analysis is included that discusses the widespread continuing obesity all over the globe consequently increasing demand for surgical devices.

Companies and Manufacturers Covered

The study covers key players operating in the market along with prime schemes and strategies implemented by each player to hold high positions in the industry. Such a tough vendor landscape provides a competitive outlook of the industry, consequently existing as a key insight. These insights were thoroughly analyzed and prime business strategies and products that offer high revenue generation capacities were indentified. Key players of the global Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories market are included as given below:

3M Health Care
Abbott Laboratories
Aerotel Medical Systems
Bayer Healthcare
Beckman Coulter
Bio-Med Devices Incorporated
Boston Scientific Corporation
BPL Healthcare Business Group
Omron Corporation
Datascope Corporation
Formosa Biomedical Technology Corporation
Fukuda Denshi
GE Healthcare
Honeywell Hommed
Innomed Medical
Philips (Invivo Corporation)
Lifescan Incorporated
Masimo Corporation
Midmark Corporation
Nihon Kohden Corporation
OSI Systems Incorporated
Philips Healthcare
Rossmax International
Schiller AG
Siemens Healthcare

Following are the segments covered by the report are:
Patient Monitor Equipment
Patient Monitor Accessories
By Application:
Disease Center

Download Full Report –

Reasons to Purchase this Report:

  • Estimates Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories development trends with SWOT analysis
  • Detailed business profiles including product offerings, recent developments, key financial information, and strategies employed by main market players
  • Analysis of various regions and countries that includes the demand and supply based actions, which consequently have a major influence on the market’s expansion
  • Market dynamics and opportunities for growth for players in the near future
  • Competitive landscape describing the Patient Monitor Equipment and Accessories market revenue shares of key players.
  • Market segmentation analysis that deals with quantitative and
Read more

Hospital-at-Home Model of Care: What to Know | Patient Advice

The future hospital looks a lot like home – and it already is in many places. Through the hospital-at-home model of care, eligible patients can receive hospital-level treatment for an acute illness or an exacerbation of a chronic condition in their own bedrooms or living rooms. “From the point of creature comforts, being at home is much better,” says William Terry of Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, 86, who in 2016 went to the emergency room with severe shaking and chills. After chest X-rays, blood tests, an electrocardiogram and an overnight hospital stay failed to reveal what was wrong with him, Brigham Health physician David Michael Levine gave Terry the option to head home with an IV needle in his arm so he could be hooked up to a pump that would deliver regular doses of antibiotics there.

(Getty Images)

Eventually it was determined that Terry had cellulitis. For five days, a doctor or nurse came to check on him twice a day, and his vital signs were monitored remotely via electrodes placed on his chest. “You can eat what you feel like eating rather than what happens to be served that day, and you can rest or go to sleep when you want to, without anyone waking you up,” Terry says. He was so pleased with the care that he chose it again in 2019 when he required treatment for a different infection.

As was the case for Terry, the process usually begins in the emergency department, where patients are evaluated and receive a diagnosis and the first round of treatment. If eligible patients choose the hospital-at-home option, a nurse or doctor will visit regularly and perform necessary examinations, blood work and other tests and treatments. Meanwhile, a patient’s vital signs and physical movement patterns are monitored around the clock with wireless technology and transmitted to the hospital staff. If patients have questions or concerns, they can talk to a nurse or doctor at the hospital at any time via video.

This is not simply a visiting nurse service, as many people assume, says Linda DeCherrie, clinical director of the Mount Sinai Hospitalization at Home program in New York City, which clicked into a higher gear this past spring as a way to free up precious inpatient beds for people battling COVID-19. “We provide the equivalent of hospital care,” she says, for patients “who in the absence of our program would be admitted to the hospital.” Granted, not everyone is eligible. Each patient has to be assessed to ensure there’s no need for ICU-level care or other services only performed in the hospital.

For many years, the model has been used in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Italy, France, Spain and Brazil. But it has been slower to catch on in the U.S. – until quite recently.

“Interest in the hospital-at-home model has been taking off,” says Bruce Leff, a geriatrician and professor of medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, who began exploring the concept in the

Read more

The US Oncology Network Warns Administration’s Most Favored Nation Model Will Disrupt Patient Access to Cancer Treatments

Washington, DC, November 24, 2020 –( )– The US Oncology Network – one of the nation’s largest and most innovative networks of community-based oncology physicians – today expressed deep concerns with the Trump Administration’s announced “most favored nation” (MFN) payment model for Medicare Part B drugs. The mandatory seven-year MFN model, scheduled to take effect in just over a month, without any opportunity for meaningful public comment, could fundamentally impact patient access to anti-cancer drugs while putting additional burdens on community providers. As finalized, the MFN model will impact virtually all community oncology providers as over half of the MFN model drugs are used in the treatment of cancer – many of which have no equivalent alternative available.

“Efforts to reduce drug spending are laudable but a mandatory program encompassing 100% of the country and disproportionately targeting oncology treatments is not a test, by any definition. Even more egregious, CMS’ own actuaries actually predict that patients will lose access to treatment under this model,” said Dr. Lucy Langer, Chair of The Network’s National Policy Board.

At the core of this model, oncologists may be forced to pay more for drugs than the Medicare reimbursement they receive. This dangerous approach will force providers to decide between withholding the standard of care or accepting unsustainable financial losses for these “underwater” drugs.

The Network also has serious reservations about the model’s alternative add-on payment for physicians. According to CMS’ own estimate, the model will not “keep providers whole” as previously promised by HHS Secretary Alex Azar. In fact, the negative financial impact of the model on cancer providers will likely exacerbate consolidation trends amongst community oncology practices, either eliminating access or pushing patients into more costly settings of care. This reckless move comes at a time when cancer treatments have already dropped drastically and all healthcare providers are being stretched thin due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Network has long expressed concerns with proposals to tie US drug prices to prices abroad, including the 2018 International Pricing Index (IPI) model. While appreciative that the MFN model does not include a third-party vendor as proposed in the IPI model, The Network remains concerned that linking the cost of Part B drugs to artificial price controls will limit patient access to current and future therapies while jeopardizing community practices. Implementing this flawed model without going through the requisite notice and comment period appears to violate both the administrative process and CMMI’s authority. “Doing so amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic only heightens these concerns and is frankly irresponsible,” said Dr. Langer.

The Network welcomes the opportunity to work collaboratively with Medicare officials and other stakeholders to implement Part B reforms in a way that does not harm physician practices or the patients they serve. Until then, The Network must oppose this rule.


Every day, The US Oncology Network helps more than 1,350 independent physicians deliver value-based, integrated care to patients — close to home. Through The Network, these independent doctors come together to form

Read more
  • Partner links