Department of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic -
Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic -
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2023 Apr;59(2):248-258. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.23.07773-0. Epub 2023 Jan 24.
INTRODUCTION: Alternatives such as remotely delivered therapy in the home environment or telehealth represent an opportunity to increase overall cardiac rehabilitation (CR) utilization. Implementing alternatives into regular practice is the next step in development; however, the cost aspect is essential for policymakers. Limited economic budgets lead to cost-effectiveness analyses before implementation. They are appropriate in cases where there is evidence that the compared intervention provides a similar health benefit to usual care. This systematic review aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of exercise-based telehealth CR interventions compared to standard exercise-based CR. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to August 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials assessing patients undergoing telehealth CR. The intervention was compared to standard CR protocols. The primary intent was to identify the cost-effectiveness. Interventions that met the criteria were home-based telehealth CR interventions delivered by information and communications technology (telephone, computer, internet, or videoconferencing) and included the results of an economic evaluation, comparing interventions in terms of cost-effectiveness, utility, costs and benefits, or cost-minimization analysis. The systematic review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO Registry (CRD42022322531). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Out of 1525 identified studies, 67 articles were assessed for eligibility, and, at the end of the screening process, 12 studies were included in the present systematic review. Most studies (92%) included in this systematic review found strong evidence that exercise-based telehealth CR is cost-effective. Compared to CBCR, there were no major differences, except for three studies evaluating a significant difference in average cost per patient and intervention costs in favor of telehealth CR. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth CR based on exercise is as cost-effective as CBCR interventions. Funding telehealth CR by third-party payers may promote patient participation to increase overall CR utilization. High-quality research is needed to identify the most cost-effective design.
简介:在家庭环境中远程提供治疗或远程医疗等替代方法代表了增加整体心脏康复(CR)利用率的机会。将替代方法纳入常规实践是下一步的发展;然而,成本方面对于政策制定者来说至关重要。有限的经济预算导致在实施之前进行成本效益分析。在有证据表明比较干预措施与常规护理提供相似的健康益处的情况下,这些分析是合适的。本系统评价旨在比较基于运动的远程医疗 CR 干预与标准基于运动的 CR 的成本效益。 证据获取:系统地检索了 PubMed 和 Web of Science 数据库,以确定截至 2022 年 8 月评估接受远程医疗 CR 的患者的随机对照试验。将干预措施与标准 CR 方案进行了比较。主要目的是确定成本效益。符合标准的干预措施是通过信息和通信技术(电话、计算机、互联网或视频会议)提供的基于家庭的远程医疗 CR 干预措施,并包括经济评估的结果,比较干预措施在成本效益、效用、成本和收益方面的结果,或成本最小化分析。系统评价方案已在 PROSPERO 注册处(CRD42022322531)注册。 证据综合:在 1525 项确定的研究中,有 67 篇文章被评估为符合条件,经过筛选过程,最终有 12 项研究被纳入本系统评价。本系统评价中纳入的大多数研究(92%)发现了强有力的证据,表明基于运动的远程医疗 CR 具有成本效益。与 CBCR 相比,除了三项研究评估了患者平均成本和干预成本有利于远程医疗 CR 的显著差异外,没有重大差异。 结论:基于运动的远程医疗 CR 与 CBCR 干预一样具有成本效益。第三方支付者为远程医疗 CR 提供资金可能会促进患者参与,以提高整体 CR 利用率。需要高质量的研究来确定最具成本效益的设计。
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2023-4
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020-11-27
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
J Telemed Telecare. 2024-4
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025-7-1
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2025-5-26
J Med Internet Res. 2025-4-29
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022-10-12
Int J Cardiol. 2022-11-15
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022-4-15
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022-1-25