But I would tell you we feel incredibly bullish around the momentum in the business. You look through the first three quarters of this year momentum has clearly picked up. It’s the strongest we’ve seen in the business in a long, long period of time. And I think 2024 sets up really nicely for us as well.
Malgorzata Kaczor: Okay. Yes. So maybe we can dive into the Zio Monitor launch itself. I think a lot of folks are suggesting you even reference yourself. It’s going to benefit return rates of devices. So again, maybe a little bit more efficient. But do you expect this or have you seen this drive new account adoption or utilization above what you thought so far? And I guess any stats to support that?
Quentin Blackford: Yes. I think it’s still a little bit early Malgorzata. Certainly in the market evaluations we’ve seen very good results with respect to return device rates. We need to see that now play out across the much larger populations that we’re beginning to introduce the product onto. But I think we all feel very good about the fact that with the improved form factor the improved wear experience but likelihood of the patient compliance and getting that product back to us is much better than what it was with XT. So we feel very good about where we think that’s going to go. We’re going to want to see the results show up before we start to guide that way. But I think the opportunity is significant. The other thing I would point to and I think the teams did a wonderful job with this with our myZio 2.0 app is that we’re seeing a much higher degree of patient engagement with our app on monitor than we did with XT.
And we know that when we get patient engagement on the app that the return rates generally, look much better, particularly in the home enrollment aspect of the product. So in time as we roll monitor out, and get it into the clinic and then on into home enrollment I think that the app experience is something that can benefit us as well.
Malgorzata Kaczor: Thanks guys.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from David Saxon of Needham. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.
David Saxon: Great. Good afternoon, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just wanted to start with the PCP or primary care strategy. I mean it sounds like that’s really driving growth in registration. So can you size that channel for us? How big is it today and where does it go over I guess your LRP? And then second to that it seems like that can be a fairly scalable channel for you guys. So when you think about the primary care channel as it relates to your progress towards profitability like how does that help you guys get there? And I’ll have a follow-up.
Quentin Blackford: Perfect. So I’ll hit the first part of that and then I’ll have Brice speak to the profitability aspect of primary care. I think we’ve been pretty clear with respect to how we’re getting after primary care. I touched on it in my prepared remarks. One is to go right at the existing accounts in these large enterprise networks that we already have a significant presence with the cardiologist and the EP. They understand the ease and value of the product and how easy it is to prescribe and apply and then ultimately get the report back. And we’re having a lot of great success with moving upstream in those enterprises to the primary care physician and seeing the prescription take place there. Ultimately I think it has the potential to meaningfully expand the amount of prescriptions within those networks as they see how easy it is to use and then really start to understand better what the patient is presenting and exactly what care pathway it ought to go down.
The other is the large primary care national accounts if you will the national networks that are out there the one medical and that sort. We’ve been really encouraged with the uptake in the adoption that we’re seeing there even down the path a bit of how we once thought about know your rhythm if you will of proactively screening populations of people. One of the encouraging things we saw in the quarter was the fact that in one of these large networks they had identified sort of a preset set of criteria that they were going to put a patch on each one of their patients. They had such terrific results with it that they ultimately expanded that out to match that of mSToPS. And we’re excited to see what that is going to ultimately generate for us into the future.
But I think what’s happening is the realization of proactively identifying these targeted populations and then seeing what they can find with this patch is terrific. That has the potential to really expand the market. When you think about the number of patients who are going through the primary care channel today, I mean there’s 14 million to 15 million folks already who have heart-related palpitations identified in their medical records. I think there’s an easy argument that that we ought to be putting a patch on the majority of those patients considering what they’re presenting with. And today, we’re talking about a market 5 million to 6 million ACM tests being prescribed each and every year. So, you can start to do the math when you think about expanding that from 5 million to 6 million to the 14 million or even more that show up in the primary care space.
That gets really exciting. And frankly in the long range plan that we put together, we did not contemplate that primary care would open up to the 14 million. We firmly believe there’s some potential there, but we wanted to see that play out before we started to bake it in the numbers. So, that does not have a big impact in LRP as currently designed, but I think it’s a nice tailwind in all of it. I’ll let Brice speak to the profitability side.
Brice Bobzien: Yes, David, I think it’s a good question. In our minds, as it’s currently sort of working through the system with moving up the care continuum for it being primary care then cardiologists, there’s not a large difference in the profitability profile. If you think about it we’re calling on these accounts anyway. It’s just being serviced by a different clinician within the network. So, not a lot of change there. Even these large national PCP sort of organizations, if anything, the profitability may not be slightly better because we’re doing really a top-to-top selling method rather than individual accounts. So, the need for the sales force itself is relatively small and it’s within the organizations where we’re continuing to see.
And I will tell you if this comes in the form of more of a revenue share or something else, there may be a different profitability profile. But as we’re seeing it manifest in its current form, there’s not much deviation. If anything, it could be a little bit more efficient for us depending on the sales model.
