Patient engagement & telehealth · Remote monitoring gateway & devices
Tenovi
Tenovi makes a plug-in cellular gateway and connected devices that send remote monitoring readings from more than 60 Bluetooth devices to care teams without Wi-Fi or an app.
Strong fit
- Remote monitoring companies, health systems, and community health centers that want one cellular hub for many brands of device
- Programs whose older patients will not keep a phone app paired with a device
- Teams that want devices, a pillbox that reports doses, and an API from one supplier
Weak fit
- Practices that want nurses and a full monitoring program from the vendor
- Programs that want each device to carry its own cellular connection with no hub in the home
- Buyers who need a published price list
Bottom line
Tenovi is a Portsmouth, New Hampshire company that makes a cellular gateway and connected devices for remote patient monitoring. The gateway plugs into a wall outlet in the patient's home, picks up readings from more than 60 FDA-cleared Bluetooth devices, and sends them to the care team without Wi-Fi or a phone app. It suits monitoring companies and health systems that want many device types behind one connection.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Nizan Friedman and Dan Zondervan founded Tenovi in 2020. They met at the University of California, Irvine, where Friedman earned a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering and Zondervan a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, and they had earlier started Flint Rehab, which makes rehabilitation devices for stroke survivors. The Tenovi Gateway is a plug-in hub about the size of a hockey puck. It listens for blood pressure cuffs, scales, pulse oximeters, glucose meters, and Tenovi's own Smart Pillbox, which lights up and reports when a compartment is opened, and sends those readings over the strongest available cellular carrier.
Tenovi ranked No. 55 on the 2025 Inc. 5000 list of fast-growing private companies. In August 2025 it said it had shipped 268,000 devices and served about 250,000 patients, and it now lists more than 180 partners.
Compare Smart Meter when a program prefers devices that each carry their own cellular connection, and Health Recovery Solutions or HealthSnap when the organization wants a vendor to run the whole monitoring program.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Health Recovery Solutions | 7.8 | 7.6 |
| HealthSnap | 7.5 | 7.6 |
| Prevounce Health | 7.3 | 7.5 |
| Tenovi | 7.3 | 7.3 |
| Smart Meter | 7.0 | 7.1 |
| ThoroughCare | 6.8 | 6.8 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Device, gateway, and data pricing quoted by Tenovi for monitoring companies, health systems, and health plans. |
| What usually drives cost | Number of gateways and devices, monthly connectivity, fulfillment services, and API use. |
| What to ask in diligence | Price per gateway and per device, the monthly connectivity fee, and terms for returns and lost devices. |
| Published pricing | No public list price. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Tenovi to function | |
| Software that receives Tenovi data | The gateway sends readings to a platform or API. |
| Device list by condition | Kits differ for blood pressure, diabetes, and heart failure. |
| Fulfillment plan | Decide whether Tenovi or your team ships kits. |
| Patient onboarding call | Patients still need to know which device to use and when. |
| Staff to act on readings | Readings need someone to review them. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Use the pillbox for patients with complex medication schedules | Missed doses show up the same day. |
| Standardize two or three kits | Fewer combinations mean fewer support calls. |
| Track readings per patient each week | Low counts flag patients to call. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| No software to receive data | |
| No staff to review readings | |
| Needs a vendor-run program | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | API or platform integration | 2-6 weeks |
| 2 | First kits shipped | 1-2 weeks |
| 3 | Program growth | 1-3 months |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.