Cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered nutrition interventions: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

CONTEXT

Telehealth-delivered nutrition interventions are effective in practice; however, limited evidence exists regarding their cost-effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telehealth-delivered nutrition interventions for improving health outcomes in adults with chronic disease.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Embase databases were systematically searched from database inception to November 2021. Included studies were randomized controlled trials delivering a telehealth-delivered diet intervention conducted with adults with a chronic disease and that reported on cost-effectiveness or cost-utility analysis outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

All studies were independently screened and extracted, and quality was appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

DATA ANALYSIS

All extracted data were grouped into subcategories according to their telehealth modality and payer perspective, and were analyzed narratively.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized controlled trials comprising 5 phone-only interventions, 3 mobile health (mHealth), 2 online, and 1 each using a combination of phone-online or phone-mHealth interventions, were included in this review. mHealth interventions were the most cost-effective intervention in all studies. Across all telehealth interventions and cost analyses from health service perspectives, 60% of studies were cost-effective. From a societal perspective, however, 33% of studies reported that the interventions were cost-effective. Of the 10 studies using cost-utility analyses, 3 were cost saving and more effective, making the intervention dominant, 1 study reported no difference in costs or effectiveness, and the remaining 6 studies reported increased cost and effectiveness, meaning payers must decide whether this falls within an acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold for them. Quality of study reporting varied with between 63% to 92%, with an average of 77% of CHEERS items reported.

CONCLUSION

Telehealth-delivered nutrition interventions in chronic disease populations appear to be cost-effective from a health perspective, and particularly mHealth modalities. These findings support telehealth-delivered nutrition care as a clinically beneficial, cost-effective intervention delivery modality.