that we agree that a full 16 days of monitoring may not always be reasonable and necessary but did not revise the 16 day per 30-day period minimum duration for all patients because CMS did not believe they had received specific clinical examples to allow for understanding under what clinical circumstances fewer days of monitoring would be medically reasonable and necessary and allow a practitioner to establish clinically meaningful care . (7) Clinical evidence shows numerous instances in which fewer than sixteen days of monitoring within a 30-day period establishes clinically meaningful care. These include: (A) Sixteen days of monitoring per 30-day period may not be required to establish that a patient has sleep apnea. (B) A patient prescribed a narcotic for pain may require their breathing to be monitored only while on the medication. (C) A patient with a chronic condition like diabetes, congestive heart failure, or obesity may have their weight monitored over a longer period of time, but it is not clinically appropriate to have such patient step on a scale 16 or more times in each 30-day period. (D) A patient whose blood pressure or oxygen levels are monitored during physical therapy may not necessitate 16 days of monitoring in each 30-day period given physical therapy is often ordered twice weekly. (E) A patient who wears a heart monitor to measure palpitations may wear the monitor continuously, but the data only needs to be collected when the individual is experiencing symptoms. (F) A patient with hypertension is often monitored for long-term management of this condition on more of a weekly basis, only needing more frequent data collection for active monitoring with changes in medication or dosages. (G) A patient who suffers from Muscular Sclerosis or Muscular Dystrophy may benefit from a provider tracking the patient’s exercise between visits to monitor certain physiologic parameters such as muscle movement but may not produce 16 days of data in a 30-day period. (H) A patient who needs a total joint