Telehealth unlikely to be cost effective for patients with long term conditions

Telehealth does not seem to be a cost effective addition to standard support and treatment for patients with long term conditions, finds a study published in the BMJ today.

The findings follow a BMJ study published last month showing that telehealth does not improve quality of life for patients with long term conditions.

Telehealth uses technology to help people with live more independently at home. For example, blood pressure or can be measured at home and electronically transmitted to a health professional, reducing the need for hospital visits.

Telehealth has been promoted to reduce while improving health related quality of life, but there is very little good quality evidence on the effect of telehealth on service use and costs.

So, a team of UK researchers examined the costs and of telehealth compared with usual care over 12 months in 965 patients with a long term condition (, or diabetes).

The study is part of the Whole Systems Demonstrator Trial - one of the largest and most comprehensive investigations of telehealth and telecare ever conducted.

Of the 965 patients, 534 received telehealth equipment and support, while 431 received usual care. The results took account of costs to both health and social care systems.

The cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) - a combined measure of quantity and quality of life – of telehealth when added to usual care was £92,000. This is well above the cost effectiveness threshold of £30,000 set by the UK National Institute for Health and (NICE). The probability of cost effectiveness was low (11%).

Even when the effects of equipment price reductions and increased working capacity of services were combined, the probability that telehealth is cost effective was only about 61%, at a threshold of £30 000 per QALY.

The authors say that the QALY gain by people using telehealth in addition to standard support and treatment was similar to those receiving usual care, and total costs for the telehealth group were higher. As such they conclude that "telehealth does not seem to be a cost effective addition to standard support and treatment."

More information: Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial, BMJ, 2013.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Telehealth keeps asthmatics out of hospitals

Oct 06, 2010

Health care delivered via telephone or Internet might not improve the quality of life for people with mild asthma, but it could keep those with severe asthma out of the hospital, a new evidence review finds.

Recommended for you

Keeping that weight loss resolution

16 hours ago

(HealthDay)—If you're one of the many Americans who plan to lose weight next year, there are a number of things you can do to improve your chances of success, an expert says.

A case for treating both mind and body

Dec 28, 2014

New research from Rutgers University lends more support to the idea that integrating treatment of mind and body could lead to better - and cheaper - medical care.

Pregnant woman taken off life support in Ireland

Dec 26, 2014

A brain-dead pregnant woman was taken off life support Friday after a court ruled that her 18-week-old fetus was doomed to die—a case that exposed fear and confusion among doctors over how to apply Ireland's ...

'Tis the season to overeat

Dec 25, 2014

(HealthDay)—Overeating is common during the holidays, but there are strategies that can help you eat in moderation, an expert says.

Don't let burns mar your holidays

Dec 25, 2014

(HealthDay)—The risk of burns from fires and cooking accidents increases during the holidays, so you need to be extra cautious, an expert says.

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.