The evidence is overwhelming. Using technology in the home of patients with chronic diseases reduces hospitalizations, emergency room visits and overall cost.
This overview analysis focused on studies that deployed some telehealth mechanism (tele-monitoring-monitoring in patient's homes, video-conferencing, nurse telephone interventions) for patients with a chronic disease, specifically, congestive heart failure (CHF), stroke, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
As an aside, it is interesting to note that as early as 1879, there is anecdotal evidence of diagnosis over the telephone. A physician listened to the cough of a child who was thought to have the croup, and determined that the child did not. The concept of medicine being delivered without a doctor present has been around longer than we might have imagined.
The studies included in this analysis took place from 2000 to early 2014. After examining hundreds of reports, this analysis found 19 CHF studies, 21 stroke studies, and 17 COPD studies that met their criterion for size and completeness. There were some experiments in video medicine, telephone check-ins, and tele-monitoring. The consistent conclusion is that doing something while the patient is not actively in the medical system improves outcomes and saves money.
As the authors say:
The preponderance of evidence from studies using rigorous research methods points to beneficial results from telemonitoring in its various manifestations, albeit with a few exceptions. Generally, the benefits include reductions in use of service: hospital admissions/readmissions, length of hospital stay, and emergency department visits typically declined. It is important that there often were reductions in mortality. Few studies reported neutral or mixed findings.
This overview analysis focused on studies that deployed some telehealth mechanism (tele-monitoring-monitoring in patient's homes, video-conferencing, nurse telephone interventions) for patients with a chronic disease, specifically, congestive heart failure (CHF), stroke, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
As an aside, it is interesting to note that as early as 1879, there is anecdotal evidence of diagnosis over the telephone. A physician listened to the cough of a child who was thought to have the croup, and determined that the child did not. The concept of medicine being delivered without a doctor present has been around longer than we might have imagined.
The studies included in this analysis took place from 2000 to early 2014. After examining hundreds of reports, this analysis found 19 CHF studies, 21 stroke studies, and 17 COPD studies that met their criterion for size and completeness. There were some experiments in video medicine, telephone check-ins, and tele-monitoring. The consistent conclusion is that doing something while the patient is not actively in the medical system improves outcomes and saves money.
As the authors say:
The preponderance of evidence from studies using rigorous research methods points to beneficial results from telemonitoring in its various manifestations, albeit with a few exceptions. Generally, the benefits include reductions in use of service: hospital admissions/readmissions, length of hospital stay, and emergency department visits typically declined. It is important that there often were reductions in mortality. Few studies reported neutral or mixed findings.
It's past time where we should be debating this. It's time to implement telehealth at every health system that is interested in better outcomes at lower cost.
Thanks to the folks at Advanced Telehealth Solutions for bringing this study to my attention in their blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment