No CrossRef data available.
Economic evaluation of remote patient monitoring and organizational analysis according to patient involvement: a scoping review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 September 2023
Abstract
Background
A literature review concerning the economic evaluation of telemonitoring was requested by the authority in charge of health evaluation in France, in a context of deployment of remote patient monitoring and identification of its financing. Due to the heterogeneity of existing telemonitoring solutions, it was necessary to stratify the evaluation according to patient involvement. Three levels of patient involvement are considered: weak (automated monitoring), medium (monitoring supported by a professional), and strong (active remote participation).
Objectives
We performed a scoping review to provide a comprehensive overview of different systems of telemonitoring and their reported cost-effectiveness.
Methods
Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a search was performed in four databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library between January 1, 2013 and May 19, 2020. Remote patient monitoring should include the combination of three elements: a connected device, an organizational solution for data analysis and alert management, and a system allowing personalized interactions, and three degrees of involvement.
Results
We identified 61 eligible studies among the 489 records identified. Heart failure remains the pathology most represented in the studies selected (n = 24). The cost-utility analysis was chosen in a preponderant way (n = 41). Forty-four studies (72 percent) reported that the intervention was expected cost-effective. Heterogeneity has been observed in the remote monitoring solutions but all systems are reported cost-effective. The small number of long-term studies does not allow conclusions to be drawn on the transposability.
Conclusions
Remote patient monitoring is reported to be cost-effective whatever the system and patient involvement.
- Type
- Assessment
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Mistry, H, Garnvwa, H, Oppong, R. Critical appraisal of published systematic reviews assessing the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies. Telemed J E-Health. 2014;20(7):609–618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ding, H, Chen, SH, Edwards, I, et al. Effects of different telemonitoring strategies on chronic heart failure care: Systematic review and subgroup meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(11):e20032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sul, AR, Lyu, DH, Park, DA. Effectiveness of telemonitoring versus usual care for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2020;26(4):189–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paré, G, Poba-Nzaou, P, Sicotte, C. Home telemonitoring for chronic disease management: An economic assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(2):155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rinaldi, G, Hijazi, A, Haghparast-Bidgoli, H. Cost and cost-effectiveness of mHealth interventions for the prevention and control of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;162:108084.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farias, FA, Dagostini, CM, Bicca, YDA, et al. Remote patient monitoring: A systematic review. Telemed J E Health. 2020;26(5):576–583.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arksey, H, O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levac, D, Colquhoun, H, O’Brien, KK. Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tricco, AC, Lillie, E, Zarin, W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drummond, MF, Sculpher, MJ, Claxton, K, Stoddart, G, Torrance, GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.Google Scholar
Husereau, D, Drummond, M, Petrou, S, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS)—explanation and elaboration: A report of the ISPOR health economic evaluation publication guidelines good reporting practices task force. Value Health. 2013;16(2):231–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehmer, SP, Maciosek, MV, Trower, NK et al. Economic evaluation of the home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist case management to control hypertension (Hyperlink) trial. J Am Coll Clin Pharm. 2018;1(1):21–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greving, JP, Kaasjager, HAH, Vernooij, JWP, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-led internet-based vascular risk factor management programme: Economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ Open. 2015;5(5):e007128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrett, S, Begg, S, O’Halloran, P, Kingsley, M. Cost-effectiveness of telephone coaching for physically inactive ambulatory care hospital patients: Economic evaluation alongside the Healthy4U randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2019;9(12):e032500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romero-Sanchiz, P, Nogueira-Arjona, R, García-Ruiz, A, et al. Economic evaluation of a guided and unguided internet-based CBT intervention for major depression: Results from a multi-center, three-armed randomized controlled trial conducted in primary care. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0172741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De San Miguel, K, Smith, J, Lewin, G. Telehealth remote monitoring for community-dwelling older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Telemed J E-Health. 2013;19(9):652–657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmier, JK, Ong, KL, Fonarow, GC. Cost‐effectiveness of remote cardiac monitoring with the CardioMEMS heart failure system. Clin Cardiol. 2017;40(7):430–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, LG, Bird, D, Oldenburg, B, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of a telephone-linked care intervention for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;104(1):103–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krishnan, A, Finkelstein, EA, Levine, E, et al. A digital behavioral weight gain prevention intervention in primary care practice: cost and cost-effectiveness analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(5):e12201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arora, M, Harvey, LA, Glinsky, JV, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of telephone-based support for the management of pressure ulcers in people with spinal cord injury in India and Bangladesh. Spinal Cord. 2017;55(12):1071–1078.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comans, T, Mihala, G, Sakzewski, L, et al. The cost‐effectiveness of a web‐based multimodal therapy for unilateral cerebral palsy: The Mitii randomized controlled trial. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2017;59(7):756–761.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Del Hoyo, J, Nos, P, Bastida, G, et al. Telemonitoring of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis (TECCU): Cost-effectiveness analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(9):e15505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heida, A, Dijkstra, A, Muller, K et al. Efficacy of home telemonitoring versus conventional follow-up: A randomized controlled trial among teenagers with inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis. 2018;12(4):432–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaier, K, Hils, S, Fetzer, S, et al. Results of a randomized controlled trial analyzing telemedically supported case management in the first year after living donor kidney transplantation-A budget impact analysis from the healthcare perspective. Health Econ Rev. 2017;7(1):1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fatoye, F, Gebrye, T, Fatoye, C, et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness analysis of telerehabilitation intervention for people with nonspecific chronic low back pain (Preprint). JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2020;8:e15375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suman, A, Schaafsma, FG, Van Dongen, JM, et al. Effectiveness and cost-utility of a multifaceted eHealth strategy to improve back pain beliefs of patients with non-specific low back pain: A cluster randomised trial. BMJ Open. 2019;9(12):e030879.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wall, LR, Kularatna, S, Ward, EC, et al. Economic analysis of a three-arm RCT exploring the delivery of intensive, prophylactic swallowing therapy to patients with head and neck cancer during (chemo) radiotherapy. Dysphagia. 2019;34(5):627–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henderson, C, Knapp, M, Fernández, JL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of telecare for people with social care needs: The whole systems demonstrator cluster randomised trial. Age Ageing. 2014;43(6):794–800.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Upatising, B, Wood, DL, Kremers, WK, et al. Cost comparison between home telemonitoring and usual care of older adults: A randomized trial (Tele-ERA). Telemed J e-Health. 2015 ; 21(1):3–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaambwa, B, Bryan, S, Jowett, S et al. Telemonitoring and self-management in the control of hypertension (TASMINH2): A cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2014;21(12):1517–1530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stoddart, A, Hanley, J, Wild, S, et al. Telemonitoring-based service redesign for the management of uncontrolled hypertension (HITS): Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5):e002681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Calò, L, Gargaro, A, De Ruvo, E, Palozzi, G et al. Economic impact of remote monitoring on ordinary follow-up of implantable cardioverter defibrillators as compared with conventional in-hospital visits. A single-center prospective and randomized study. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2013;37(1):69–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guédon-Moreau, L, Lacroix, D, Sadoul, N et al. Costs of remote monitoring vs. ambulatory follow-ups of implanted cardioverter defibrillators in the randomized ECOST study. Europace. 2014;16(8):1181–1188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heidbuchel, H, Hindricks, G, Broadhurst, P et al. EuroEco (European Health Economic Trial on Home Monitoring in ICD Patients): A provider perspective in five European countries on costs and net financial impact of follow-up with or without remote monitoring. Eur Heart J. 2015.36(3)/158–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zanaboni, P, Landolina, M, Marzegalli, M et al. Cost-utility analysis of the EVOLVO study on remote monitoring for heart failure patients with implantable defibrillators: Randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(5):e106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddison, R, Rawstorn, JC, Stewart, RA, et al. Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: Randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Heart. 2019;105(2):122–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comín-Colet, J, Enjuanes, C, Verdú-Rotellar, JM, et al. Impact on clinical events and healthcare costs of adding telemedicine to multidisciplinary disease management programmes for heart failure: Results of a randomized controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare. 2016;22(5):282–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cui, Y, Doupe, M, Katz, A, Nyhof, P, Forget, EL. Economic evaluation of Manitoba Health Lines in the management of congestive heart failure. Healthc Policy. 2013;9(2):36–50.Google ScholarPubMed
Frederix, I, Vanderlinden, L, Verboven, AS, et al. Long-term impact of a six-month telemedical care programme on mortality, heart failure readmissions and healthcare costs in patients with chronic heart failure. J Telemed Telecare. 2019;25(5):286–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sangster, J, Church, J, Haas, M, Furber, S, Bauman, A. A comparison of the cost-effectiveness of two pedometer-based telephone coaching programs for people with cardiac disease. Heart Lung Circ. 2015;24(5):471–479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vestergaard, AS, Hansen, L, Sørensen, SS, et al. Is telehealthcare for heart failure patients cost-effective? An economic evaluation alongside the Danish TeleCare North heart failure trial. BMJ Open. 2020;10(1):e031670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desteghe, L, Vijgen, J, Koopman, P, et al. Telemonitoring-based feedback improves adherence to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants intake in patients with atrial fibrillation. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(16):1394–1403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, P, Hollinghurst, S, Ara, R et al. Cost-effectiveness modelling of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: Evidence from a cohort simulation conducted alongside the Healthlines randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2016;6(9):e012355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hazenberg, A, Kerstjens, HA, Prins, SC, et al. Initiation of home mechanical ventilation at home: A randomised controlled trial of efficacy, feasibility and costs. Respir Med. 2014;108(9);1387–1395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lugo, VM, Garmendia, O, Suarez-Girón, M, et al. Comprehensive management of obstructive sleep apnea by telemedicine: Clinical improvement and cost-effectiveness of a Virtual Sleep Unit. A randomized controlled trial. PloS One. 2019;14(10):e0224069.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDowell, JE, McClean, S, FitzGibbon, F, Tate, S. A randomised clinical trial of the effectiveness of home-based health care with telemonitoring in patients with COPD. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21(2):80–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paré, G, Poba-Nzaou, P, Sicotte, C et al. Comparing the costs of home telemonitoring and usual care of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: A randomized controlled trial. Eur Res Telemed./La Recherche Européenne en Télémédecine 2013;2(2):35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shany, T, Hession, M, Pryce, D et al. A small-scale randomised controlled trial of home telemonitoring in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Telemed Telecare. 2017; 23(7):650–656.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soriano, JB, García-Río, F, Vázquez-Espinosa, E, et al. A multicentre, randomized controlled trial of telehealth for the management of COPD. Respir Med. 2018;144:74–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varney, JE, Liew, D, Weiland, TJ,et al. The cost-effectiveness of hospital-based telephone coaching for people with type 2 diabetes: A 10 years modelling analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warren, R, Carlisle, K, Mihala, G, Scuffham, PA. Effects of telemonitoring on glycaemic control and healthcare costs in type 2 diabetes: A randomised controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24(9):586–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Little, P, Stuart, B, Hobbs, FR, et al. An internet-based intervention with brief nurse support to manage obesity in primary care (POWeR+): A pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(10):821–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishman, PA, Cook, AJ, Anderson, ML, et al. Improving BP control through electronic communications: An economic evaluation. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19(9):709.Google ScholarPubMed
Kloek, CJJ, van Dongen, JM, de Bakker, DH, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: A cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1082.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez-Villegas, A, Catalan-Matamoros, D, Peiro, S et al. Cost–utility analysis of telemonitoring versus conventional hospital-based follow-up of patients with pacemakers. The NORDLAND randomized clinical trial. PloS One. 2020;15(1):e0226188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frederix, I, Solmi, F, Piepoli, MF, Dendale, P. Cardiac telerehabilitation: A novel cost-efficient care delivery strategy that can induce long-term health benefits. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24(16):1708–1717.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hwang, R, Morris, NR, Mandrusiak, A, et al. Cost-utility analysis of home-based telerehabilitation compared with centre-based rehabilitation in patients with heart failure. Heart Lung Circ. 2019;28(12):1795–1803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kidholm, K, Rasmussen, MK, Andreasen, JJ, et al. Cost-utility analysis of a cardiac telerehabilitation program: The teledialog project. Telemed J E-Health. 2016;22(7):553–563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kraal, JJ, Van den Akker-Van Marle, ME, Abu-Hanna, A, et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@ Home study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24(12):1260–1273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brabyn, S, Araya, R, Barkham, M et al. The second Randomised Evaluation of the Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and Acceptability of Computerised Therapy (REEACT-2) trial: Does the provision of telephone support enhance the effectiveness of computer-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy? A randomised controlled trial. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20:1–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi Yoo, SJC, Nyman, JA, Cheville, AL, Kroenke, K. Cost effectiveness of telecare management for pain and depression in patients with cancer: Results from a randomized trial. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014;36(6):599–606.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Compen, F, Adang, E, Bisseling, E, van der Lee, M, Speckens, A. Cost‐utility of individual internet‐based and face‐to‐face mindfulness‐based cognitive therapy compared with treatment as usual in reducing psychological distress in cancer patients. Psycho‐Oncol. 2020;29(2):294–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dear, BF, Zou, JB, Ali, S et al. Clinical and cost-effectiveness of therapist-guided internet-delivered cognitive behavior therapy for older adults with symptoms of anxiety: A randomized controlled trial. Behav Ther. 2015;46(2):206–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donohue, JM, Belnap, BH, Men, A et al. Twelve-month cost-effectiveness of telephone-delivered collaborative care for treating depression following CABG surgery: A randomized controlled trial. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2014;36(5):453–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morriss, R, Patel, S, Malins, S et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of remotely delivered cognitive behaviour therapy versus treatment as usual for repeat unscheduled care users with severe health anxiety: A multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMC Med. 2019;17(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nobis, S, Ebert, DD, Lehr, D et al. Web-based intervention for depressive symptoms in adults with types 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus: A health economic evaluation. Br J Psychiatry. 2018;212(4):199–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Painter, JT, Fortney, JC, Austen, MA, Pyne, JM. Cost-effectiveness of telemedicine-based collaborative care for posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychiatr Serv. 2017;68(11):1157–1163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Painter, JT, Fortney, JC, Gifford, AL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of collaborative care for depression in human immunodeficiency virus clinics. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;70(4):377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoddart, A, van der Pol, M, Pinnock, H, et al. Telemonitoring for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A cost and cost-utility analysis of a randomised controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21(2):108–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turino, C, de Batlle, J, Woehrle, H, et al. Management of continuous positive airway pressure treatment compliance using telemonitoring in obstructive sleep apnoea. Eur Respir J. 2017;49(2):1601128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Udsen, FW, Lilholt, PH, Hejlesen, O, Ehlers, L. Cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Results from the Danish ‘TeleCare North’cluster-randomised trial. BMJ Open. 2017;7(5):e014616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowie, MR, Simon, M, Klein, L, Thokala, P. The cost‐effectiveness of real‐time pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in heart failure patients: A European perspective. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017;19(5):661–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iribarren, SJ, Cato, K, Falzon, L, Stone, PW. What is the economic evidence for mHealth? A systematic review of economic evaluations of mHealth solutions. PloS One. 2017;12(2):e0170581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De La Torre-Díez, I, López-Coronado, M, Vaca, C, et al. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness studies of telemedicine, electronic, and mobile health systems in the literature: A systematic review. Telemed J e-Health. 2015;21(2):81–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, X, Ming, WK, You, JH. The cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions on the management of cardiovascular diseases: Systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(6):e13166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farabi, H, Rezapour, A, Jahangiri, R. et al. Economic evaluation of the utilization of telemedicine for patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review. Heart Fail Rev. 2020;25(6):1063–1075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Akiyama, M, Yoo, BK. A systematic review of the economic evaluation of telemedicine in Japan. J Prev Med Public Health. 2016;49(4):183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klersy, C, Boriani, G, De Silvestri, A, et al. Effect of telemonitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices on healthcare utilization: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials in patients with heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2016;18(2):195–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hameed, AS, Sauermann, S, Schreier, G. The impact of adherence on costs and effectiveness of telemedical patient management in heart failure: A systematic review. Appl Clin Inform. 2014;5(3):612.Google ScholarPubMed
Stevenson, JK, Campbell, ZC, Webster, AC, et al. eHealth interventions for people with chronic kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;8:CD012379.Google ScholarPubMed
Zhai, YK, Zhu, WJ, Cai, YL, Sun, DX, Zhao, J. Clinical-and cost-effectiveness of telemedicine in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine. 2014;93(28):e312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Udsen, FW, Hejlesen, O, Ehlers, LH. A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Telemed Telecare. 2014;20(4):212–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Massoud, B, Holvast, F, Bockting, CL, Burger, H, Blanker, MH. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of e-health interventions for depression and anxiety in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2019;45:728–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanyal, C, Stolee, P, Juzwishin, D, Husereau, D. Economic evaluations of eHealth technologies: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2018;13(6):e0198112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elbert, NJ, van Os-Medendorp, H, van Renselaar, W, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of ehealth interventions in somatic diseases: A systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Med Internet Res. 2014;6(4):e110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grustam, AS, et al. Care coordination in a business-to-business and a business-to-consumer model for telemonitoring patients with chronic diseases. Int J Care Coord. 2017;20(4):135–147.Google Scholar
Acheampong, F, Vimarlund, V. Business models for telemedicine services: A literature review. Health Syst. 2015;4(3):189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eze, ND, Mateus, C, Cravo Oliveira Hashiguchi, T. Telemedicine in the OECD: An umbrella review of clinical and cost-effectiveness, patient experience and implementation. PloS One. 2020;15(8):e0237585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mair, FS, Haycox, A, May, C, Williams, T. A review of telemedicine cost-effectiveness studies. J Telemed Telecare. 2000;6(1_suppl):38–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, CM, Urbach, DR, Ray, JG, et al. Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: Systematic review. Br Med J. 2006;332(7543):699–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, W, Lv, X, Xu, X, et al. Telemedicine intervention–reduced blood pressure in a chronic disease population: A meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2022;28:621–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, JY, Lee, SWH. Telemedicine cost–effectiveness for diabetes management: A systematic review. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20(7):492–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-Villegas, A, Catalán-Matamoros, D, Martín-Saborido, C, et al. A systematic review of economic evaluations of pacemaker telemonitoring systems. Rev Esp Cardiol (English Edition). 2016;69(2):125–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bongiovanni-Delarozière, I, Le Goff-Pronost, M, Rapp, T. Cost-effectiveness of telemedicine: lessons to learn from an international review. Value Health. 2014;17(7):A425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haute Autorité de Santé. Efficience de la télémédecine: état des lieux de la littérature internationale et cadre d’évaluation, Paris; 2013.Google Scholar
Bergmo, TS. Economic evaluation in telemedicine–still room for improvement. J Telemed Telecare. 2010;16(5):229–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Goff-Pronost and Bongiovanni-Delarozière supplementary material
File
45.3 KB