| Literature DB >> 34222509 |
Aziz Rezapour1, Seyede Sedighe Hosseinijebeli2, Saeed Bagheri Faradonbeh1.
Abstract
Population aging has increased the need for long-term care of older persons who suffer from multi-morbidity and chronic conditions. Today, the majority of older people are living alone in their home in which they try to cope with highly risky conditions such as sensory impairment, diminished mobility, and medication management. Recent developments in information technologies could improve the access to care for older people as well as reducing the need for full-time caregivers both in homes and institutions such as nursery homes and hospitals. This study aimed to review the economic evaluation of such technological advancements in the care of older people. Through a systematic approach, electronic databases were searched and of 2732 records retrieved, three papers were included in the final review. Three different models of economic evaluation including cost analysis, cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis were applied in these studies in the context of telemedicine and older persons' care. Since the methodological approaches were quite different and the outcomes reported were not consistent between studies, no meta-analysis was applicable and we qualitatively reviewed the papers. All studies have reported cost savings associated with the use of telemedicine technologies such as video visits and smart homes in the care of older persons. Copyright:Entities:
Keywords: Aging; cost-effectiveness; telemedicine
Year: 2021 PMID: 34222509 PMCID: PMC8224483 DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_787_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Educ Health Promot ISSN: 2277-9531
Figure 1Study retrieval : Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Economic evaluation assessment (Cheers checklist)
| Reference number/criteria | 11 | 12 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Title | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 2 Abstract | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 3 Background and objectives | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 4 Target population and subgroups | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 5 Setting and location | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 6 Study perspective | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 7 Comparators | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 8 Time horizon | No | Yes | Yes |
| 9 Discount rate | No | No | Yes |
| 10 Choice of health outcomes | Yes | No | Yes |
| 11a Measurement of effectiveness | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 11b Measurement of effectiveness | NA | NA | NA |
| 12 Measurement and valuation of preference based outcomes | No | NA | NA |
| 13a Estimating resources and costs | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 13b Estimating resources and costs | NA | NA | NA |
| 14 Currency, price date, and conversion | No | No | Yes |
| 15 Choice of model | No | No | Yes |
| 16 Assumptions | No | No | Yes |
| 17 Analytical methods | No | No | Yes |
| 18 Study parameters | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 19 Incremental costs and outcomes | Yes | No | No |
| 20a Characterizing uncertainty | No | Yes | Yes |
| 20b Characterizing uncertainty | No | No | No |
| 21 Characterizing heterogeneity | No | No | NA |
| 22 Study findings, limitations, generalizability, and current knowledge | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 23 Source of funding | No | Yes | Yes |
| 24 Conflicts of interest | No | Yes | Yes |
NA=Not available
Data extraction
| Author year | Service setting | Study design | Economic evaluation | Assessment quality | perspective | Time horizon | Sample size | Cost measure ment | Conse quence measurement | Key findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Versleijen | Hospital geriatric visit | Case study | Cost analysis | One way sensitivity analysis of all parameters | Health service | Per annum | 20 patients | Cost per patient per round | 131AUD$ saving by using tele geriatric model | |
| Aanesen | Home care | Review of case studies | CEA | Home care providers, relatives, hospital | Cost per visit | Percentage annual average wage costs per patient | The annual cost of nursing per patient 5296€ , twice as using SHT | |||
| Akiyama | Home care | Implementation study | CBA | Mont carlo simulation | Societal | 5 years | Capital +operation cost | Annual WTP | Base case BCR of model 1 and 2 was 1.63 and1.03 respec tively | |
| Giordano | Home care | RCT | Societal | 6 months | 290 patients | Healthcare and patient cost cost diary | Fall reduction |
RCT=Randomized controlled trial, WTP=Willingness to pay, CEA=Cost Effectiveness Analysis , CBA=Cost Benefit Analysis, BCR=Benefit Cost Ratio, SHT=Smart Home Technology