Efficacy and cost effectiveness of telemedicine for improving access to care in the Paris region: study protocols for eight trials

Nathanael Charrier, Kevin Zarca, Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, Christine Calinaud, ARS Ile de France telemedicine group, Nathanael Charrier, Kevin Zarca, Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, Christine Calinaud, ARS Ile de France telemedicine group

Abstract

Background: With the development of information and communication technologies, telemedicine has been proposed as a way to improve patient management by facilitating access to appropriate diagnosis and treatment. The Paris Ile de France Regional Health Agency is currently funding a comprehensive program of telemedicine experiments. This article describes the protocols for the evaluation of the implementation of telemedicine in the Paris region.

Methods/design: Over 2,500 patients have been included in eight studies addressing the use of telemedicine in the context of specific diseases or settings. Two projects are randomized controlled trials, while the six other projects are based on before-after designs (differences in differences studies). Based on the MAST model and the French national framework, we identified endpoints to assess the impact of telemedicine on five dimensions: clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, security of the application, patient satisfaction and quality of life and perception of professionals.

Discussion: Telemedicine encompasses a wide range of services and stakeholders, and thus study protocols must be tailored to the specific constraints and interests of the users.

Trial registration: NCT02110433 (03/07/2014), NCT02157740 (05/27/2014), NCT02374697 (02/05/2015), NCT02157727 (05/27/2014), NCT02229279 (08/28/2014), NCT02368769 (02/05/2015), NCT02164747 (NCT02164747), NCT02309905 (11/27/2014).

References

    1. Oliveira TC, Branquinho MJ, Gonçalves L. State of the art in telemedicine - concepts, management, monitoring and evaluation of the telemedicine programme in Alentejo (Portugal) Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012;179:29–37.
    1. Demaerschalk BM, Raman R, Ernstrom K, Meyer BC. Efficacy of telemedicine for stroke: pooled analysis of the Stroke Team Remote Evaluation Using a Digital Observation Camera (STRokE DOC) and STRokE DOC Arizona telestroke trials. Telemed J E Health. 2012;18:230–237. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2011.0116.
    1. Maddry JK, Sessions D, Heard K, Lappan C, McManus J, Bebarta VS. Wartime toxicology: evaluation of a military medical toxicology telemedicine consults service to assist physicians serving overseas and in combat (2005–2012) J Med Toxicol. 2014;10:261–265. doi: 10.1007/s13181-014-0398-z.
    1. Harrison R, Clayton W, Wallace P. Can telemedicine be used to improve communication between primary and secondary care? BMJ. 1996;313:1377–1380. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7069.1377.
    1. Drop SLS, Mure P-Y, Wood D, El-Ghoneimi A, Faisal Ahmed S. E-consultation for DSD: a global platform for access to expert advice. J Pediatr Urol. 2012;8:629–632. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2012.10.009.
    1. Wynn R, Hagen K, Friborg O. Videoconferencing at a centre for rare disorders: user satisfaction and user participation. Acta Paediatr. 2012;101:e83–85. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02466.x.
    1. Kidholm K, Ekeland AG, Jensen LK, Rasmussen J, Pedersen CD, Bowes A, et al. A model for assessment of telemedicine applications: mast. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28:44–51. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000638.
    1. Steventon A, Bardsley M, Billings J, Dixon J, Doll H, Hirani S, et al. Whole System Demonstrator Evaluation Team: Effect of telehealth on use of secondary care and mortality: findings from the Whole System Demonstrator cluster randomised trial. BMJ. 2012;344:e3874. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e3874.
    1. Haute Autorité de Santé - Efficience de la télémédecine : état des lieux de la littérature internationale et cadre d’évaluation []
    1. Mistry H, Garnvwa H, Oppong R. Critical appraisal of published systematic reviews assessing the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine studies. Telemed J E Health. 2014;20:609–618. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0259.
    1. Sanson-Fisher RW, D’Este CA, Carey ML, Noble N, Paul CL. Evaluation of systems-oriented public health interventions: alternative research designs. Annu Rev Public Health. 2014;35:9–27. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182445.
    1. Tubach F, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Dougados M, Bellamy N, et al. Using patients’ and rheumatologists’ opinions to specify a short form of the WOMAC function subscale. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:75–79. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.019539.
    1. Newman S, Rixon L, Hirani S, Cartwright M, Beynon M, Cleanthous S, Selva A: Quantifying beliefs regarding telehealth: development of the SUTAQ service user technology acceptability questionnaire. 2011.
    1. StatsToDo Home Page. . Accessed 29 December 2015.
    1. Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández J-L, Beecham J, Hirani SP, Cartwright M, et al. Whole System Demonstrator evaluation team: Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013;346:f1035. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f1035.
    1. Riva JJ, Malik KMP, Burnie SJ, Endicott AR, Busse JW. What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians. J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2012;56:167–171.
    1. Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-54.
    1. Hussey MA, Hughes JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28:182–191. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2006.05.007.
    1. Mdege ND, Man M-S, Taylor Nee Brown CA, Torgerson DJ. Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:936–948. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.12.003.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel