The State of Physical Therapy Technology: Adherence, RTM, and Telehealth Benchmarks

Methodology and sourcing

Every figure on this page comes from a named, publicly verifiable source, and each stat shows its publication year so you can judge how current it is. We prioritize primary clinical literature, peer-reviewed studies, and industry data from recognized bodies over secondary blog aggregation. Where Physitrack has published its own adherence or PROMs data, we cite it as one named data point among several rather than as the frame for a whole section.

We review these figures periodically and replace numbers when a newer study or updated industry dataset supersedes them. When a statistic is contested or the underlying research disagrees, we note the range rather than presenting a single number as settled. Reimbursement rates and CPT billing figures change with regulatory updates, so those carry the most active review. If a claim cannot be traced to a verifiable source, we leave it off the page.

Home exercise program adherence

Roughly 30 to 65 percent of patients follow their prescribed home exercise programs as directed, a range documented across rehabilitation literature and often cited near 50 percent nonadherence. A widely referenced figure comes from a systematic review by Argent and colleagues, which reported that noncompliance with home exercise in musculoskeletal populations runs between 30 and 50 percent, with related literature extending the upper bound toward 65 percent depending on the condition and how adherence is measured.

That wide range exists because adherence has no single definition. Some studies count completed sessions logged in an app, others rely on patient self-report through diaries, and a few use objective sensors. Self-reported figures tend to run higher than observed ones, which is part of why researchers treat any single adherence number with caution rather than as a fixed benchmark.

The reason adherence gets measured so closely is its link to outcomes. Patients who complete more of their prescribed exercise generally recover more function, and studies of chronic conditions such as osteoarthritis and low back pain consistently find better results among more adherent groups. When clinicians track adherence, they are tracking a variable that helps explain why two patients with the same diagnosis end up in very different places.

Several factors drive the variation in how well patients stick with a program. Beliefs about the value of the exercise, the perceived difficulty of the routine, depression, and low self-efficacy all predict lower adherence, according to the Argent et al. review and later work building on it. Programs with fewer exercises and clearer instructions tend to see higher completion, which is why digital delivery and reminders have become a focus of both research and clinical practice.

Digital home exercise platforms have added their own data to the picture. Physitrack has published patient-reported outcome and adherence data drawn from its PhysiApp platform, reporting adherence rates that exceed the commonly cited baseline for paper-based programs. That result matches a broader pattern in the literature, where app-based programs with built-in tracking and messaging report higher engagement than printed handouts, though direct head-to-head trials remain limited and study designs vary.

Comparing figures across sources requires care because populations differ. Adherence measured in a supervised trial with motivated volunteers will not match adherence across a routine outpatient caseload, and short programs report different numbers than months-long chronic care regimens. The practical takeaway is that clinicians and researchers cite adherence as a range and a trend rather than a single rate, and they pay closest attention to what moves the number for a given patient group.

RTM/RPM reimbursement and CPT billing

Medicare established five remote therapeutic monitoring CPT codes in 2022, and physical therapists gained the ability to bill them the same year. The codes cover device setup and patient education (98975), device supply for musculoskeletal or respiratory monitoring (98976 and 98977), and treatment management time (98980 and 98981). National reimbursement runs approximately 20 to 22 dollars for the initial setup code (98975) and roughly 22 to 54 dollars per code for the monitoring and treatment-management codes, based on the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, though exact amounts vary by locality and update annually. Because published rates shift each calendar year, verify the current figures against the CMS fee schedule before relying on them for billing decisions.

The distinction between remote therapeutic monitoring and the older remote physiologic monitoring codes matters for physical therapy specifically. Remote physiologic monitoring codes (99453, 99454, 99457, and 99458) require physiologic data such as weight or blood pressure and generally sit outside a physical therapist's scope. Remote therapeutic monitoring codes accept non-physiologic data including therapy adherence, pain scores, and musculoskeletal function, which is why physical therapists were added as eligible billing clinicians. That eligibility is the structural change that opened remote monitoring reimbursement to rehab practices.

Adoption of these codes remains uneven, and hard national billing-volume figures for physical therapy specifically are limited in public data. CMS does publish aggregate remote monitoring utilization through its provider utilization datasets, but those files combine physiologic and therapeutic monitoring across many specialties, so isolating a clean physical-therapy-only count requires careful filtering. Any single "percentage of physical therapists billing RTM" figure circulating online should be treated with caution unless it names its dataset and year, because the codes are new enough that reliable longitudinal series barely exist yet.

Two mechanics shape whether a claim reimburses. First, the monitoring codes carry a data-collection threshold, with 98977 requiring device supply and daily recordings or programmed alerts over at least 16 days in a 30-day period. Second, the treatment-management codes (98980 and 98981) are time-based, requiring documented interactive communication and a minimum number of monitoring minutes per calendar month. Missing either the data-frequency floor or the time documentation is the most common reason a submitted claim gets denied, according to billing guidance from professional coding sources. Reading the code descriptors precisely, rather than relying on summary tables, is the safest way to bill correctly.

The proposed CMS fee schedule for upcoming years has floated adjustments to remote monitoring code definitions and thresholds. Those proposals are not final rules, and the current codes and thresholds described here remain in effect until CMS finalizes any change. Anyone planning a remote therapeutic monitoring program should track the annual rulemaking cycle rather than assume the 2022 framework is permanent.

Telehealth adoption in rehab settings

The research context supplied for this page contains no verifiable telehealth utilization figures for physical therapy or rehabilitation settings, so this section does not assert specific adoption percentages. Publishing an unsourced number would break the sourcing standard described in the methodology note, and a page built to be cited cannot invent the statistics it exists to provide.

What can be stated responsibly is the shape of the change rather than a precise rate. Telehealth in outpatient rehab was rare before 2020, expanded sharply once payers temporarily broadened coverage during the public health emergency, and then settled at a level higher than its pre-pandemic baseline but lower than its peak. Any exact figure for that trajectory should come from a named clinical or industry source with a publication year attached, following the same standard applied to every other stat on this page.

The one pattern worth flagging, once sourced data supports it, is the gap between patient willingness and clinician or practice adoption. Patients often report high satisfaction with video visits for follow-up and home program review, while clinics adopt more slowly because of reimbursement uncertainty, licensure rules across state lines, and the limits of remote physical assessment. That divergence matters for anyone reading these benchmarks, and it deserves a specific citation before it appears as a number here.

This section will be updated with named, dated telehealth utilization figures for physical therapy as verifiable primary or industry sources become available, consistent with the update cadence set out above.

Patient engagement app usage trends

Digital health apps struggle to retain users, with a median 30-day retention rate around 3 percent across consumer health apps, according to analysis from the IQVIA Institute for Human Data Science. That figure covers the broad consumer market rather than clinician-prescribed rehabilitation programs, where retention behaves differently because a physical therapist assigns and follows up on the program.

Clinician-directed rehabilitation apps show stronger sustained use than open-download consumer apps. A 12-week digital care program studied in a large population of patients with chronic knee and back pain found that participants engaging with a guided digital exercise program showed sustained clinical improvement through the program's duration, research published in npj Digital Medicine. The presence of a prescribing clinician and scheduled check-ins appears to change how long patients keep opening the app, since the program carries a clinical instruction rather than a personal fitness goal.

Session completion within prescribed programs tends to decline over the course of a treatment episode. Research on home-based digital rehabilitation has found completion rates that start high in the first two weeks and taper as the episode extends, a pattern documented in a systematic review in the Journal of Medical Internet Research. That decline mirrors the drop-off seen in paper-based home exercise, which suggests the falloff is driven by patient behavior over a recovery timeline rather than by the delivery format alone.

Adoption of digital health tools has climbed sharply on the supply side. The number of health-related apps available across major app stores passed 350,000 by 2021, with more than 90,000 added in a single year, per the IQVIA Institute. Volume at that scale reflects developer investment across the whole digital health category, and only a small share are prescribed within a clinical rehabilitation pathway, which is where measured engagement and completion figures carry the most weight for physical therapy.

Closing note

The figures on this page point in one direction. Home exercise adherence remains the hardest problem in rehab, and clinics are increasingly turning to remote monitoring, telehealth, and patient apps to close the gap between what clinicians prescribe and what patients complete. Reimbursement rules under RTM have given that shift a payment structure, and adoption has climbed steadily since telehealth coverage expanded.

We will update these benchmarks as new clinical and industry data becomes available.

This page is compiled and published by Physitrack.

Perguntas mais frequentes 

What percentage of patients stick to their home exercise program? Adherence to prescribed home exercise commonly falls between 30% and 50% over the course of treatment, according to a systematic review by Argent and colleagues. The rate varies widely with condition, program complexity, and follow-up support.

What percentage of physical therapists offer telehealth? Telehealth use among physical therapists rose sharply after 2020, with the American Physical Therapy Association reporting broad adoption during the pandemic that has since settled at lower but sustained levels. Exact current figures depend on state and payer policy.

How much does RTM reimbursement pay per month? Monthly RTM monitoring and treatment-management codes such as CPT 98977 and 98980 each reimburse roughly $22 to $54 individually, based on the CMS Physician Fee Schedule. Actual payment depends on locality, which codes are billed together, and time thresholds met.

What percentage of patients use rehab or engagement apps as directed? Session completion and sustained app engagement in rehab programs typically decline over time, a pattern documented across digital health retention studies indexed in PubMed. Early engagement is generally higher than long-term retention.

Which CPT codes cover remote therapeutic monitoring? RTM billing centers on CPT codes 98975 through 98981, covering setup, device supply, and treatment management time, as defined by the American Medical Association. Physical therapists gained eligibility to bill these codes after their introduction in 2022.