Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review

W R Hersh, M Helfand, J Wallace, D Kraemer, P Patterson, S Shapiro, M Greenlick, W R Hersh, M Helfand, J Wallace, D Kraemer, P Patterson, S Shapiro, M Greenlick

Abstract

Background: The use of telemedicine is growing, but its efficacy for achieving comparable or improved clinical outcomes has not been established in many medical specialties. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of telemedicine interventions for health outcomes in two classes of application: home-based and office/hospital-based.

Methods: Data sources for the study included deports of studies from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and HealthSTAR databases; searching of bibliographies of review and other articles; and consultation of printed resources as well as investigators in the field. We included studies that were relevant to at least one of the two classes of telemedicine and addressed the assessment of efficacy for clinical outcomes with data of reported results. We excluded studies where the service did not historically require face-to-face encounters (e.g., radiology or pathology diagnosis). All included articles were abstracted and graded for quality and direction of the evidence.

Results: A total of 25 articles met inclusion criteria and were assessed. The strongest evidence for the efficacy of telemedicine in clinical outcomes comes from home-based telemedicine in the areas of chronic disease management, hypertension, and AIDS. The value of home glucose monitoring in diabetes mellitus is conflicting. There is also reasonable evidence that telemedicine is comparable to face-to-face care in emergency medicine and is beneficial in surgical and neonatal intensive care units as well as patient transfer in neurosurgery.

Conclusions: Despite the widespread use of telemedicine in virtually all major areas of health care, evidence concerning the benefits of its use exists in only a small number of them. Further randomized controlled trials must be done to determine where its use is most effective.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Search strategies. Search strategies for MEDLINE shown; comparable strategies were used for EMBASE, CINAHL, and HealthSTAR.

References

    1. Hersh WR, Helfand M, Wallace JA, Kraemer DK, Patterson PK, Shapiro SE, Greenlick MR, Chan BKS, Eilers GM. Telemedicine for the Medicare Population. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 24. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E012. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2001.
    1. Grigsby J, Sanders J. Telemedicine: where it is and where it's going. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1998;129:123–127.
    1. Strode SW, Gustke S, Allen A. Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1999;281:1066–1068. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.12.1066.
    1. Balas EA, Jaffrey F, Kuperman GJ, Boren SA, Brown GD, Pinciroli F, Mitchell JA. Electronic communication with patients evaluation of distance medicine technology. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1997;278:152–159. doi: 10.1001/jama.278.2.152.
    1. Ohinmaa A, Hailey D, Roine D. The Assessment of Telemedicine: General Principles and a Systematic Review. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Office for Health Care Technology Assessment; 1999.
    1. Almazan C, Gallo P. Assesssing Clinical Benefit and Economic Evaluation in Telemedicine. Barcelona, Spain: Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment; 1999.
    1. Currell R, Urquhart C, Wainwright P, Lewis R. Telemedicine versus face to face patient care: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [computer file] 2000. p. CD002098.
    1. Mair F, Whitten P. Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine. British Medical Journal. 2000;320:1517–1520. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1517.
    1. Whitten P, Kingsley C, Grigsby J. Results of a meta-analysis of cost-benefit research: is this a question worth asking? Journal of Telemedicine & Telecare. 2000;6:S4–S6. doi: 10.1258/1357633001934177.
    1. Hersh WR, Wallace JA, Kraemer DK, Patterson PK, Nichols P, Greenlick MR, Helfand M. Telemedicine for the Medicare Population: Pediatric, Obstetric, and Clinician-Indirect Home Interventions. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 24, Supplement. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E060. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2001.
    1. Anonymous. Telehealth and Telemedicine in Quebec: Current Issues. Quebec: Conseil d'Evaluation des Technologies de la Sante du Quebec; 1999.
    1. Anonymous. Issues and Opportunities Facing VHA Telemedicine: Reinventing Service To Patients. Washington, DC: Department of Veteran's Affairs Telemedicine Strategic Healthcare Group; 1999.
    1. Grigsby B, Brown N. Report on U.S. Telemedicine Activity. Portland, OR: Association of Telemedicine Service Providers; 1998.
    1. Rosenthal BE. Telemedicine Sourcebook 1998: A Resource Guide for the Practical Application of Telemedicine in the Managed Care Marketplace. New York: Faulkner & Gray, Inc.; 1997.
    1. Chesnut RM, Carney N, Maynard H, Patterson PK, Mann NC, Helfand M. Rehabilitation for Traumatic Brain Injury. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 2. AHRQ Publication No. 99-E006. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1999.
    1. Marrero DG, Vandagriff JL, Kronz K, Fineberg NS, Golden MP, Gray D, Orr DP, Wright JC, Johnson NB. Using telecommunication technology to manage children with diabetes: the Computer-Linked Outpatient Clinic (CLOC) Study. Diabetes Educator. 1995;21:313–319.
    1. Ahring KK, Ahring JP, Joyce C, Farid NR. Telephone modem access improves diabetes control in those with insulin-requiring diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1992;15:971–975.
    1. Biermann E, Dietrich W, Standl E. Telecare of diabetic patients with intensified insulin therapy: a randomized clinical trial. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics. 2000;77:327–332.
    1. Billiard A, Rohmer V, Roques M, Joseph M, Suraniti S, Giraud P, Limal J, Fressinaud P, Marre M. Telematic transmission of computerized blood glucose profiles for IDDM patients. Diabetes Care. 1991;14:130–134.
    1. Mease A, Whitlock WL, Brown A, Moore K, Pavliscsak H, Dingbaum A, Lacefield D, Buker K, Xenakis S. Telemedicine improved diabetic management. Military Medicine. 2000;165:579–584.
    1. Shultz EK, Bauman A, Hayward M, Holzman R. Improved care of patients with diabetes through telecommunications. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1992;670:141–145.
    1. di Biase N, Napoli A, Sabbatini A, Borrello E, Buongiorno AM, Fallucca F. Telemedicine in the treatment of diabetic pregnancy. Annali dell Istituto Superiore di Sanita. 1997;33:347–351.
    1. Frost D, Beischer W. Telemedicine in the management of pregnancy in type 1 diabetic women [letter]. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:863–864.
    1. Johnston B, Wheeler L, Deuser J, Sousa KH. Outcomes of the Kaiser Permanente Tele-Home Health Research Project. Archives of Family Medicine. 2000;9:40–45. doi: 10.1001/archfami.9.1.40.
    1. Nakamura K, Takano T, Akao C. The effectiveness of videophones in home healthcare for the elderly. Medical Care. 1999;37:117–125. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199902000-00002.
    1. Mahmud K, Lenz J. The personal telemedicine system: a new tool for the delivery of health care. Journal of Telemedicine & Telecare. 1995;1:173–177.
    1. Friedman RH, Kazis LE, Jette A, Smith MB, Stollerman J, Torgerson J, Carey K. A telecommnnications system for monitoring and counseling patients with hypertension. Impact on medication adherence and blood pressure control. American Journal of Hypertension. 1996;9:285–292. doi: 10.1016/0895-7061(95)00353-3.
    1. Cartwright W. Objective measurement of anxiety in hypertensive pregnant women managed in hospital and in the community. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1992;99:182–185.
    1. Flatley-Brennan P. Computer network home care demonstration: a randomized trial in persons living with AIDS. Computers in Biology & Medicine. 1998;28:489–508. doi: 10.1016/S0010-4825(98)00029-8.
    1. Gustafson DH, Hawkins R, Boberg E, Pingree S, Serlin RE, Graziano F, Chan CL. Impact of a patient-centered, computer-based health information/support system. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 1999;16:1–9. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00108-1.
    1. Brennan PF, Moore SM, Smyth KA. The effects of a special computer network on caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's Disease. Nursing Research. 1995;44:166–172.
    1. Sparks KE, Shaw DK, Eddy D, Hanigosky P, Vantrese J. Alternatives for cardiac rehabilitation patients unable to return to a hospital-based program. Heart & Lung. 1993;22:298–303.
    1. Gray J, Safran C, Davis RB, Pompilio-Weitzner G, Stewart JE, Zaccagnini L, Pursley D. Baby CareLink: using the Internet and telemedicine to improve care of high-risk infants. Pediatrics. 2000;106:1318–1324.
    1. Miyasaka K, Suzuki Y, Sakai H, Kondo Y. Interactive communication in high-technology home care: videophones for pediatric ventilatory care. Pediatrics. 1997;99:E1.
    1. Loane M, Bloomer S, Corbett R, Eedy D, Hicks N, Lotery H, Mathews C, Paisley J, Steele K, Wootten R. A randomized controlled trial to assess the clinical effectiveness of both realtime and store-and-forward teledermatology compared with conventional care. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2000;6:S1–S3. doi: 10.1258/1357633001933952.
    1. Brennan JA, Kealy JA, Gerardi LH, Shih R, Allegra J, Sannipoli L, Lutz D. randomized controlled trial of telemedicine in an emergency department. Journal of Telemedicine & Telecare. 1998;4:18–20. doi: 10.1258/1357633981931911.
    1. Wootton R, Bloomer SE, Corbett R, Eedy DJ, Hicks N, Lotery HE, Mathews C, Paisley J, Steele K, Loane MA. Multicentre randomised control trial comparing real time teledermatology with conventional outpatient dermatological care: societal cost-benefit analysis. British Medical Journal. 2000;320:1252–1256. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1252.
    1. Rosenfeld BA, Dorman T, Breslow MJ, Pronovost P, Jenckes M, Zhang N, Anderson G, Rubin H. Intensive care unit telemedicine: alternative paradigm for providing continuous intensivist care. Critical Care Medicine. 2000;28:3925–3931.
    1. Rendina MC. The effect of telemedicine on neonatal intensive care unit length of stay in very low birthweight infants. Proceedings of the 1998 AMIA Annual Fall Symposium. 1998. pp. 111–115.
    1. Goh KY, Tsang KY, Poon WS. Does teleradiology improve inter-hospital management of head-injury? Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences. 1997;24:235–239.
    1. Goh KY, Lam CK, Poon WS. The impact of teleradiology on the inter-hospital transfer of nenrosurgical patients. British Journal of Neurosurgery. 1997;11:52–56. doi: 10.1080/02688699746708.
    1. Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, Greenhalgh R, Edwards SJ. Trials and fast changing technologies: the case for tracker studies. British Medical Journal. 2000;320:43–46. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.43.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir