Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5bf98f6d76-gckwl Total loading time: 0.359 Render date: 2021-04-20T21:15:50.334Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

RESPONSE TO ON THE COSTS OF HOME-BASED TELEMEDICINE PROGRAMS: A COMMENT ON MICHAUD ET AL.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 December 2018

Tzeyu L. Michaud
Affiliation:
Center for Reducing Health Disparities, College of Public Health, Department of Health Promotion, College of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE, USAtzeyu.michaud@unmc.edu
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Letter to the Editor
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Dear Dr. Babidge:

We thank Dr. Kidholm for his knowledgeable comments on our study (Reference Michaud, Zhou, McCarthy, Siahpush and Su1), and we would like to clarify aspects of our methodology.

Dr. Kidholm notes potential concerns about our conclusion that “All selected studies indicate that home telemedicine programs reduce care costs, although detailed cost data were either incomplete or not presented in detail.” In this statement, we attempted to highlight the difficulty for relevant stakeholders to make informed decision for future adoption and/or implementation based on the existing evidence even though all included studies in our review concluded home monitoring programs reduced costs in the absence of detailed cost information. We agree that we could have made the conclusion clearer in the study by reflecting the uncertainty and methodological problems embedded in the included studies with low level of quality of evidence as shown in the previous study (Reference Mistry2). We also agree that the advance of technology and the prevalent use of patients’ own monitoring devices should be taken into account when considering the economic consequences of home telemedicine programs.

In addition, we recognize that most reviews of economic evaluations of telemedicine do not follow the guideline for economic evaluation. However, the primary objective of our study was to understand the cost structures and cost components of home telemedicine based on a systematic review approach instead of a scoping review of full-scale economic evaluation of telemedicine that Drs. Kidholm and Kristensen conducted (Reference Kidholm and Kristensen3). Moreover, because we aimed to identify costs of home telemedicine programs in the published literature to facilitate the future adoption, implementation, and sustainability, we limited the studies with telemedicine in the U.S. setting due to the difference and diversity of healthcare systems and culture abroad. Moreover, we inclined not to miss any potential eligible studies by limiting the study design to randomized control trials only and conducting searches not only in the Medline database, which were used in Drs. Kidholm and Kristensen's review, but also expanding our search to Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases to retrieve as many potential studies as possible.

We are also aware of the concern that no study published after 2010 was included in our review, yet the search timeline was set from January 1, 2000, to November 30, 2017. This reflects a severe paucity in the existing literature of reporting economic evidence of telemedicine in the U.S. setting, as also shown in Drs. Kidholm and Kristensen's study- no study from the United States was included based on their review criteria.

In summary, we concur with Drs. Kidholm and Kristensen's conclusion from their review that inclusion of other databases for the literature search, other disease groups, and other types of telemedicine may have altered the review results, as demonstrated by our study.

References

1.Michaud, TL, Zhou, J, McCarthy, MA, Siahpush, M, Su, D. Costs of home-based telemedicine programs: A systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2018;34:410-418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Mistry, H. Systematic review of studies of the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and telecare. Changes in the economic evidence over twenty years. J Telemed Telecare. 2012;18:1-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Kidholm, K, Kristensen, MBD. A scoping review of economic evaluations alongside randomized controlled trials of home monitoring in chronic disease management. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2018;16:167-176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 33
Total number of PDF views: 119 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 31st December 2018 - 20th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

You have Access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

RESPONSE TO ON THE COSTS OF HOME-BASED TELEMEDICINE PROGRAMS: A COMMENT ON MICHAUD ET AL.
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

RESPONSE TO ON THE COSTS OF HOME-BASED TELEMEDICINE PROGRAMS: A COMMENT ON MICHAUD ET AL.
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

RESPONSE TO ON THE COSTS OF HOME-BASED TELEMEDICINE PROGRAMS: A COMMENT ON MICHAUD ET AL.
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *