Approaches to economic evaluation in telemedicine

External validity or generalizability is a major challenge in the economic evaluation of telemedicine. There are two possible ways of increasing generalizability: the first is to use a pragmatic trial design so it better reflects normal patient caseload and everyday practice. The second is to use existing data from the literature and decision modelling to estimate the expected costs and outcomes of different alternatives. The first will increase generalizability to other patients than those in the trial and the second will increase generalizability from place to place. The objective and role of the evaluation will decide the most appropriate evaluation approach. Pragmatic trials should be used in studies where the objective is to provide measurements of costs and outcomes for a specific group of patients in a particular setting. This approach is highly relevant in telemedicine evaluations where the objective is to support local investments strategies and reimbursement systems. Decision modelling provides an overall structure for a decision problem and a formal analysis of the implications of different decisions. Modelling can simulate a trial or mimic a current system or a system that decision makers would like to use. Modelling is a useful approach when decisions need to be made about whether to invest in telemedicine within a broader context.

[1]  M J Buxton,et al.  Modelling in economic evaluation: an unavoidable fact of life. , 1997, Health economics.

[2]  Ian Harvey,et al.  A pragmatic–explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers , 2009, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[3]  P Wainwright,et al.  Virtual outreach: economic evaluation of joint teleconsultations for patients referred by their general practitioner for a specialist opinion , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  T. Reardon,et al.  Research findings and strategies for assessing telemedicine costs. , 2005, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[5]  R. Thomson,et al.  Decision analysis in evidence-based decision making. , 2000, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[6]  N. Bruce,et al.  Quantitative Methods for Health Research , 2008 .

[7]  J. Whited The quality of telemedicine research , 2006, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[8]  R. Willke,et al.  Good research practices for cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials: the ISPOR RCT-CEA Task Force report. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[9]  M. Drummond,et al.  Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice , 2002 .

[10]  Michael T French,et al.  Economic evaluation of telemedicine: review of the literature and research guidelines for benefit-cost analysis. , 2009, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[11]  Milton C Weinstein,et al.  Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices--Modeling Studies. , 2003, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  Louis P Garrison The ISPOR Good Practice Modeling Principles--a sensible approach: be transparent, be reasonable. , 2003, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  G. Andersen,et al.  National Use of Thrombolysis with Alteplase for Acute Ischaemic Stroke via Telemedicine in Denmark , 2008, CNS drugs.

[14]  D. Eedy,et al.  Multicentre randomised control trial comparing real time teledermatology with conventional outpatient dermatological care: societal cost-benefit analysis , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[15]  Trine S Bergmo,et al.  Can economic evaluation in telemedicine be trusted? A systematic review of the literature , 2009, Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E.

[16]  I. Kristiansen,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce the thrombolytic delay for acute myocardial infarction , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[17]  Howard Raiffa,et al.  Decision analysis: introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. 1968. , 1969, M.D.Computing.