Determining the cost of implementing and operating a remote patient monitoring programme for the elderly with chronic conditions: A systematic review of economic evaluations

Abstract

Introduction Remote patient monitoring (RPM) in conjunction with home nursing visits is becoming increasingly popular for the follow-up of patients with chronic conditions and evidence exists that it improves patients' health outcomes. Current cost data is reported inconsistently and often gathered from studies of poor methodological quality, making it difficult for decision-makers who consider implementing this service in their organizations. This study reviewed the cost of RPM programmes targeting elderly patients with chronic conditions. Methods After evaluation against the inclusion and exclusion criteria and appraisal against two criteria which are important for economic evaluations, data from selected studies were extracted and grouped into meaningful cost categories, then adjusted to reflect November 2015 US dollars. Results In the 13 selected studies, the newly-created cost category 'Combined intervention cost' (reflecting equipment purchasing, servicing and monitoring cost) for the various RPM programmes ranged from US$275-US$7963 per patient per year. The three main findings are: (a) RPM programme costs have decreased since 2004 due to cheaper technology; (b) monitoring a single vital sign is likely to be less costly than monitoring multiple vital signs; and (c) programmes targeting hypertension or congestive heart failure are less costly than those targeting respiratory diseases or multiple conditions. Conclusions This review recommends that future studies present their cost data with more granularity, that grouping of costs should be minimized and that any assumptions, such as amortization, should be made explicit. In addition, studies should compare programmes with similar characteristics in terms of type of conditions, number of vital signs monitored, etc. for more generalizable results.

Tele-medicine: a new promised land, just to save resources?

“…3) In superiority or non-inferiority studies, the definition of "standard therapy" as a term of comparison is important. Studies should compare programmes with similar characteristics in terms of type of patients, disease stage, resources spent, physiological parameters and clinical signs recorded and transmitted [18]. The superiority (if any) of this new method of care must be compared with the different homecare organisations of different countries.…”

Measuring the effectiveness of digital nursing technologies: development of a comprehensive digital nursing technology outcome framework based on a scoping review

“…Many systematic reviews in the field of technology and nursing conclude that solid evidence with respect to effectiveness is lacking [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12], mainly due to a weak level of evidence and the incomparability of the study results. For this reason, a comprehensive outcome framework detailing the multitude of possible outcome areas could be useful for generating more comparable results.…”

A Remote Patient Monitoring Intervention for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Heart Failure: Pre-Post Economic Analysis of the Smart Program (Preprint)

“…As the literature has recommended RPM which can support more than one condition [31], our study shows that a RPM system targeting more than one condition can be successfully implemented. A review [32] suggested that more details on cost including amortization should be made explicit as we have done here. This study represents another case study to support the potential value of RPM by examining both costs and outcomes of RPM where the outcomes (measured in hospitalization and ER visits) have been converted to monetary values.…”