Cost-effectiveness of telecare for people with social care needs: the Whole Systems Demonstrator cluster randomised trial

Purpose of the study: to examine the costs and cost-effectiveness of ‘second-generation’ telecare, in addition to standard support and care that could include ‘first-generation’ forms of telecare, compared with standard support and care that could include ‘first-generation’ forms of telecare. Design and methods: a pragmatic cluster-randomised controlled trial with nested economic evaluation. A total of 2,600 people with social care needs participated in a trial of community-based telecare in three English local authority areas. In the Whole Systems Demonstrator Telecare Questionnaire Study, 550 participants were randomised to intervention and 639 to control. Participants who were offered the telecare intervention received a package of equipment and monitoring services for 12 months, additional to their standard health and social care services. The control group received usual health and social care. Primary outcome measure: incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The analyses took a health and social care perspective. Results: cost per additional QALY was £297,000. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves indicated that the probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay of £30,000 per QALY gained was only 16%. Sensitivity analyses combining variations in equipment price and support cost parameters yielded a cost-effectiveness ratio of £161,000 per QALY. Implications: while QALY gain in the intervention group was similar to that for controls, social and health services costs were higher. Second-generation telecare did not appear to be a cost-effective addition to usual care, assuming a commonly accepted willingness to pay for QALYs. Trial registration number: ISRCTN 43002091.

[1]  Martin Knapp,et al.  The effect of telecare on the quality of life and psychological well-being of elderly recipients of social care over a 12-month period: the Whole Systems Demonstrator cluster randomised trial. , 2014, Age and ageing.

[2]  S. Newman,et al.  Systematic review of the effects of telecare provided for a person with social care needs on outcomes for their informal carers. , 2013, Health & social care in the community.

[3]  Jennifer Dixon,et al.  Effect of telecare on use of health and social care services: findings from the Whole Systems Demonstrator cluster randomised trial , 2013, Age and ageing.

[4]  Martin Knapp,et al.  Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study , 2012, BMC Health Services Research.

[5]  Richard Grieve,et al.  Developing Appropriate Methods for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Cluster Randomized Trials , 2012, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[6]  J. Forder,et al.  Measuring the outcomes of long-term care. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[7]  D. King,et al.  Projections of Demand for and Costs of Social Care for Older People in England, 2010 to 2030, under Current and Alternative Funding Systems. , 2011 .

[8]  P. Bower,et al.  A comprehensive evaluation of the impact of telemonitoring in patients with long-term conditions and social care needs: protocol for the whole systems demonstrator cluster randomised trial , 2011, BMC health services research.

[9]  Megs Okoye,et al.  A Vision for Adult Social Care: Capable Communities and Active Citizens , 2011 .

[10]  2010‐based national population projections ‐ principal projection and key variants , 2011 .

[11]  John L. Campbell,et al.  The impact of social isolation on the health status and health-related quality of life of older people , 2011, Quality of Life Research.

[12]  The Initial Evaluation of the Scottish Telecare Development Program , 2010 .

[13]  L. Curtis,et al.  Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2016 , 2015 .

[14]  Bleddyn P. Davies,et al.  Securing Good Care for Older People: Taking a Long-term View , 2007 .

[15]  Grazyna Adamiak,et al.  Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes, 3rd ed , 2006 .

[16]  R. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Quality of life in older people: A structured review of generic self-assessed health instruments , 2005, Quality of Life Research.

[17]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. , 2005, Health economics.

[18]  A. Dhar,et al.  National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence , 2005 .

[19]  D. Quinton,et al.  Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2004 , 2004 .

[20]  William Gould,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation with stata , 1999 .

[21]  D J Torgerson,et al.  Pragmatic trials: lab meets bedside , 2019, The British journal of dermatology.

[22]  Paul Kind,et al.  A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey , 1995 .

[23]  Martin Knapp,et al.  Costing psychiatric interventions. , 1992 .

[24]  M. Drummond,et al.  Health Care Technology: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Public Policy@@@Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes , 1988 .

[25]  K. Abromeit Music Received , 2023, Notes.