Study quality and evidence of benefit in recent assessments of telemedicine

Author:

Hailey David1,Ohinmaa Arto1,Roine Risto2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton and Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

2. Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital Group, Helsinki, Finland

Abstract

We carried out a systematic review of recent telemedicine assessments to identify scientifically credible studies that included comparison with a non-telemedicine alternative and that reported administrative changes, patient outcomes or the results of an economic assessment. From 605 publications identified in the literature search, 44 papers met the selection criteria and were included in the review. Four other publications were identified through references cited in one of the retrieved papers and from a separate project to give a total of 48 papers for consideration, which referred to 42 telemedicine programmes and 46 studies. Some kind of economic analysis was included in 25 (52%) of the papers. In considering the studies, we used a quality appraisal approach that took account of both study design and study performance. For those studies that included an economic analysis, a further quality-scoring approach was applied to indicate how well the economic aspects had been addressed. Twenty-four of the studies were judged to be of high or good quality and 11 of fair to good quality but with some limitations. Seven studies were regarded as having limited validity and a further four as being unacceptable for decision makers. New evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of telemedicine was given by studies on geriatric care, intensive care and some of those on home care. For a number of other applications, reports of clinical or economic benefits essentially confirmed previous findings. Although further useful clinical and economic outcomes data have been obtained for some telemedicine applications, good-quality studies are still scarce.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Informatics

Cited by 124 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3