Cost of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease: a systematic review protocol

Abstract

Objective:This review aims to evaluate the costs and cost-effectiveness of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease in the United States.Introduction:Cardiovascular disease is a leading public health concern in the United States, resulting in a substantial economic burden. Remote patient monitoring has emerged as a viable and valuable care delivery method to improve cardiovascular disease management at home. However, there is limited systematic research of the cost and cost-effectiveness of using remote patient monitoring to manage the disease.Inclusion criteria:This review will consider all studies evaluating the cost of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease management in the United States. The population of interest includes all individuals with various types of chronic cardiovascular disease in the United States.Methods:The search strategy will locate both published and unpublished studies. Systematic searches will be completed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion between all study members. The JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be utilized to evaluate the methodological quality of studies. Data will be extracted using a modified version of the JBI data extraction form for economic evaluations. Reviewers will summarize studies and cost-related metrics. The Dominance Ranking Matrix will be used to synthesize full economic evaluation.Systematic review registration number:PROSPERO CRD42021270621

Economic evaluation and costs of remote patient monitoring for cardiovascular disease in the United States: a systematic review

“…This systematic review was conducted following the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of economic evidence in accordance with a published protocol (15;16), associated registration on PROSPERO (CRD42021270621), and written following PRISMA reporting guidelines.…”

“…Data were extracted from studies included in the review by two independent reviewers (YZ and MTP) using a modified JBI data extraction tool for economic evaluation (15), to consider key elements of both partial and full economic evaluations. The data extracted include specific details about the participants, study design, interventions, comparators, study perspectives, time horizons, analysis type, clinical effectiveness, and costs and costeffectiveness outcomes of significance to the review objective (16). If an article reported results from multiple studies, we extracted data for all eligible studies and analyzed them separately.…”