1Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA. 2Independent Consultant, Rochester, NY. 3Department of Family and Community Medicine, Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA. 4Department of Pediatrics, Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, Center for Health and Technology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA.
Crit Care Med. 2016 Feb;44(2):265-74. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001426.
Despite telemedicine's potential to improve patients' health outcomes and reduce costs in the ICU, hospitals have been slow to introduce telemedicine in the ICU due to high up-front costs and mixed evidence on effectiveness. This study's first aim was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of telemedicine in the ICU, compared with ICU without telemedicine, from the healthcare system perspective. The second aim was to examine potential cost saving of telemedicine in the ICU through probabilistic analyses and break-even analyses.
Simulation analyses performed by standard decision models.
Hypothetical ICU defined by the U.S. literature.
Hypothetical adult patients in ICU defined by the U.S. literature.
The intervention was the introduction of telemedicine in the ICU, which was assumed to affect per-patient per-hospital-stay ICU cost and hospital mortality. Telemedicine in the ICU operation costs included the telemedicine equipment-installation (start-up) costs with 5-year depreciation, maintenance costs, and clinician staffing costs. Telemedicine in the ICU effectiveness was measured by cumulative quality-adjusted life years for 5 years after ICU discharge.
The base case cost-effectiveness analysis estimated telemedicine in the ICU to extend 0.011 quality-adjusted life years with an incremental cost of $516 per patient compared with ICU without telemedicine, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $45,320 per additional quality-adjusted life year (= $516/0.011). The probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis estimated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $50,265 with a wide 95% CI from a negative value (suggesting cost savings) to $375,870. These probabilistic analyses projected that cost saving is achieved 37% of 1,000 iterations. Cost saving is also feasible if the per-patient per-hospital-stay operational cost and physician cost were less than $422 and less than $155, respectively, based on break-even analyses.
Our analyses suggest that telemedicine in the ICU is cost-effective in most cases and cost saving in some cases. The thresholds of cost and effectiveness, estimated by break-even analyses, help hospitals determine the impact of telemedicine in the ICU and potential cost saving.
尽管远程医疗有可能改善 ICU 患者的健康结果并降低成本,但由于前期成本高和有效性证据不一,医院在 ICU 中引入远程医疗的速度一直很慢。本研究的第一个目的是进行成本效益分析,从医疗保健系统的角度估算 ICU 中引入远程医疗与无远程医疗的 ICU 相比的增量成本效益比。第二个目的是通过概率分析和盈亏平衡分析来检验 ICU 中远程医疗的潜在成本节约。
通过标准决策模型进行模拟分析。
由美国文献定义的假设性 ICU。
由美国文献定义的假设性 ICU 成年患者。
干预措施是在 ICU 中引入远程医疗,这被认为会影响每位患者每次住院的 ICU 成本和医院死亡率。ICU 中远程医疗的运营成本包括远程医疗设备安装(启动)成本,折旧期为 5 年,维护成本和临床医生人员配备成本。ICU 出院后 5 年内的累积质量调整生命年来衡量 ICU 中远程医疗的效果。
基础病例成本效益分析估计,与无远程医疗的 ICU 相比,ICU 中的远程医疗将延长 0.011 个质量调整生命年,每位患者的增量成本为 516 美元,导致每增加一个质量调整生命年的增量成本效益比为 45320 美元(=516/0.011)。概率成本效益分析估计,增量成本效益比为 50265 美元,95%CI 范围很广,从负数(表示成本节约)到 375870 美元。这些概率分析预测,在 1000 次迭代中,有 37%的情况下会实现成本节约。如果每次住院的运营成本和医生成本分别低于 422 美元和 155 美元,则基于盈亏平衡分析,也可以实现成本节约。
我们的分析表明,在大多数情况下,ICU 中的远程医疗具有成本效益,在某些情况下具有成本节约。通过盈亏平衡分析估算的成本和效果阈值有助于医院确定 ICU 中远程医疗的影响和潜在成本节约。