Roine R, Ohinmaa A, Hailey D
Finnish Office for Health Care Technology Assessment, Helsinki, Finland.
CMAJ. 2001 Sep 18;165(6):765-71.
To clarify the current status of telemedicine, we carried out a systematic review of the literature. We identified controlled assessment studies of telemedicine that reported patient outcomes, administrative changes or economic assessments and assessed the quality of that literature.
We carried out a systematic electronic search for articles published from 1966 to early 2000 using the MEDLINE (1966-April 2000), HEALTHSTAR (1975-January 2000), EMBASE (1988-February 2000) and CINALH (1982-January 2000) databases. In addition, the HSTAT database (Health Services/Technology Assessment Text, US National Library of Medicine), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE, NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, United Kingdom), the NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched. We consulted experts in the field and did a manual search of the reference lists of review articles.
A total of 1124 studies were identified. Based on a review of the abstracts, 133 full-text articles were obtained for closer inspection. Of these, 50 were deemed to represent assessment studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria of the review. Thirty-four of the articles assessed at least some clinical outcomes; the remaining 16 were mainly economic analyses. Most of the available literature referred only to pilot projects and short-term outcomes, and most of the studies were of low quality. Relatively convincing evidence of effectiveness was found only for teleradiology, teleneurosurgery, telepsychiatry, transmission of echocardiographic images, and the use of electronic referrals enabling e-mail consultations and video conferencing between primary and secondary health care providers. Economic analyses suggested that teleradiology, especially transmission of CT images, can be cost-saving.
Evidence regarding the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of telemedicine is still limited. Based on current scientific evidence, only a few telemedicine applications can be recommended for broader use.
为阐明远程医疗的现状,我们对文献进行了系统综述。我们检索了报告患者预后、管理变革或经济评估的远程医疗对照评估研究,并对该文献的质量进行了评估。
我们利用MEDLINE(1966年 - 2000年4月)、HEALTHSTAR(1975年 - 2000年1月)、EMBASE(1988年 - 2000年2月)和CINALH(1982年 - 2000年1月)数据库,对1966年至2000年初发表的文章进行了系统的电子检索。此外,还检索了HSTAT数据库(卫生服务/技术评估文本,美国国立医学图书馆)、有效性综述摘要数据库(DARE,英国国家卫生服务系统综述与传播中心)、英国国家卫生服务系统经济评估数据库和Cochrane对照试验注册库。我们咨询了该领域的专家,并对综述文章的参考文献列表进行了手工检索。
共识别出1124项研究。通过对摘要的审查,获得了133篇全文文章进行更深入的检查。其中,50篇被认为代表了符合综述纳入标准的评估研究。34篇文章评估了至少一些临床结果;其余16篇主要是经济分析。现有文献大多仅提及试点项目和短期结果,且大多数研究质量较低。仅在远程放射学、远程神经外科、远程精神病学、超声心动图图像传输以及使用电子转诊实现初级和二级医疗保健提供者之间的电子邮件咨询和视频会议方面,发现了相对有说服力的有效性证据。经济分析表明,远程放射学,尤其是CT图像传输,可以节省成本。
关于远程医疗有效性或成本效益的证据仍然有限。基于当前的科学证据,仅推荐少数远程医疗应用进行更广泛的使用。