Cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from the Danish 'TeleCare North' cluster-randomised trial

Flemming Witt Udsen, Pernille Heyckendorff Lilholt, Ole Hejlesen, Lars Ehlers, Flemming Witt Udsen, Pernille Heyckendorff Lilholt, Ole Hejlesen, Lars Ehlers

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealthcare solution in addition to usual care compared with usual care.

Design: A 12-month cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a cluster-randomised trial.

Setting: Community-based setting in the geographical area of North Denmark Region in Denmark.

Participants: 26 municipality districts define randomisation clusters with 13 districts in each arm. 1225 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were enrolled, of which 578 patients were randomised to telehealthcare and 647 to usual care.

Interventions: In addition to usual care, patients in the intervention group received a set of telehealthcare equipment and were monitored by a municipality-based healthcare team. Patients in the control group received usual care.

Main outcome measure: Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years gained from baseline up to 12 months follow-up.

Results: From a healthcare and social sector perspective, the adjusted mean difference in total costs between telehealthcare and usual care was €728 (95% CI -754 to 2211) and the adjusted mean difference in quality-adjusted life-years gained was 0.0132 (95% CI -0.0083 to 0.0346). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €55 327 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Decision-makers should be willing to pay more than €55 000 to achieve a probability of cost-effectiveness >50%. This conclusion is robust to changes in the definition of hospital contacts and reduced intervention costs. Only in the most optimistic scenario combining the effects of all sensitivity analyses, does the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below the UK thresholds values (€21 068 per quality-adjusted life-year).

Conclusions: Telehealthcare is unlikely to be a cost-effective addition to usual care, if it is offered to all patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and if the willingness-to-pay threshold values from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are applied.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01984840, 14 November 2013.

Keywords: COPD; Cost-effectiveness; Denmark; Economic Evaluation; RCT; Telecare; Telehealth; Telemonitoring.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve in the base-case analysis. QALY, quality-adjusted life-year.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for sensitivity analyses. QALY, quality-adjusted life-year.

References

    1. Roisen RR, Vestbo J. Global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease – Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [Internet, 2013. Available from
    1. McCance K, Huether S, Brashers V, et al. ; The biologic basis for disease in adults and children. 6th edition Maryland Heights: Mosby Elsevier, 2010.
    1. Bailey PH. The dyspnea-anxiety-dyspnea cycle--COPD patients’ stories of breathlessness: "It’s scary /when you can’t breathe". Qual Health Res 2004;14:760–78.10.1177/1049732304265973
    1. Vos T, Barber RM, Bell B, et al. . Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Lancet 2015;386:743–800.10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60692-4
    1. Adeloye D, Chua S, Lee C, et al. . Global and regional estimates of COPD prevalence: Systematic review and meta–analysis. J Glob Health 2015;5:20415.10.7189/jogh.05.020415
    1. Burney PG, Patel J, Newson R, et al. . Global and regional trends in COPD mortality, 1990-2010. Eur Respir J 2015;45:1239–47.10.1183/09031936.00142414
    1. Divo M, Cote C, de Torres JP, et al. . Comorbidities and risk of mortality in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012;186:155–61.10.1164/rccm.201201-0034OC
    1. Barnes PJ, Celli BR. Systemic manifestations and comorbidities of COPD. Eur Respir J 2009;33:1165–85.10.1183/09031936.00128008
    1. Bentsen SB, Rokne B, Wahl AK. Comparison of health-related quality of life between patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the general population. Scand J Caring Sci 2013;27:905–12.10.1111/scs.12002
    1. DiBonaventura M, Paulose-Ram R, Su J, et al. . The impact of COPD on quality of life, productivity loss, and resource use among the Elderly United States workforce. COPD 2012;9:46–57.10.3109/15412555.2011.634863
    1. Foster TS, Miller JD, Marton JP, et al. . Assessment of the economic burden of COPD in the U.S.: a review and synthesis of the literature. COPD 2006;3:211–8.10.1080/15412550601009396
    1. Flachs EM, Eriksen L, Koch MB. The disease burden in Denmark. 2015.
    1. McLean S, Nurmatov U, Liu JL, et al. . Telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;7:1–52.
    1. Miller EA. Solving the disjuncture between research and practice: telehealth trends in the 21st century. Health Policy 2007;82:133–41.10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.09.011
    1. Haesum LK, Soerensen N, Dinesen B, et al. . Cost-utility analysis of a telerehabilitation program: a case study of COPD patients. Telemed J E Health 2012;18:688–92 10.1089/tmj.2011.0250
    1. Johnston B, Wheeler L, Deuser J, et al. . Outcomes of the Kaiser Permanente Tele-Home Health Research Project. Arch Fam Med 2000;9:40–5.10.1001/archfami.9.1.40
    1. Koff PB, Jones RH, Cashman JM, et al. . Proactive integrated care improves quality of life in patients with COPD. Eur Respir J 2009;33:1031–8.10.1183/09031936.00063108
    1. Pare G, Poba-Nzaou P, Sicotte C, et al. . Comparing the costs of home telemonitoring and usual care of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: a randomized controlled trial. Eur Res Telemed [Internet]. 2013. 2 35–47
    1. Vitacca M, Bianchi L, Guerra A, et al. . Tele-assistance in chronic respiratory failure patients: a randomised clinical trial. Eur Respir J 2009;33:411–8.10.1183/09031936.00005608
    1. Goldstein RS, O’Hoski S. Telemedicine in COPD: time to pause. Chest 2014;145:945–9.10.1378/chest.13-1656
    1. Jaana M, Paré G, Sicotte C, et al. . Home telemonitoring for respiratory conditions: a systematic review. Am J Manag Care 2009;15:313–20
    1. Mistry H. Systematic review of studies of the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine and telecare. Changes in the economic evidence over twenty years. J Telemed Telecare 2012;18:1–6.10.1258/jtt.2011.110505
    1. Polisena J, Coyle D, Coyle K, et al. . Home telehealth for chronic disease management: a systematic review and an analysis of economic evaluations. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2009;25:339–49.10.1017/S0266462309990201
    1. Polisena J, Tran K, Cimon K, et al. . Home telehealth for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare 2010;16:120–7.10.1258/jtt.2009.090812
    1. Udsen FW, Hejlesen O, Ehlers LH. A systematic review of the cost and cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Telemed Telecare 2014;20:212–20.10.1177/1357633X14533896
    1. Udsen F, Lilholt P, Hejlesen O, et al. . Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: study protocol for the danish “TeleCare North” pragmatic cluster-randomized trial. Trials 2014.
    1. The State Serum Institute. The danish national patient register (Internet). 2014.
    1. Sundhedsdatastyrelsen (No English translation). Reimbursement And financing (DRG) (Internet).DRG tariffs.
    1. Danish register for COPD.Datadefinitions 2015.
    1. National Health Insurance Service Register, 2014. Available from:
    1. Danish Medical Association. Collective agreement between Danish Regions and general practice 2014 Current collective agreement. .
    1. Register of Medicinal Product Statistics [Internet]. 2014.
    1. Danish Medicines Agency. Prices of medicines [Internet]. Reimbursement and prices
    1. North Denmark Region.Disease specific health agreement on COPD 2015-2018 , 2011.
    1. Rasmussen H. Number of patients with chronic heart failure in North Denmark Region, 2015.
    1. Average salary for administrative officer including pensions and pay supplements [Internet. 2014 SIRKA, 2014. Available from
    1. Agency for Modernisation at the Ministry of Finance. depreciation rates, other IT-equipment [Internet]. General accounting procedures 2015.
    1. The State Serum Institute. The danish register of causes of death, 2014.
    1. Wittrup-Jensen KU, Lauridsen J, Gudex C, et al. . Generation of a danish TTO value set for EQ-5D health states. Scand J Public Health 2009;37:459–66.10.1177/1403494809105287
    1. van Reenen M, Oppe M. EQ-5D-3L user Guide. EuroQol Res Found 2015;22.
    1. Ramsey SD, Willke RJ, Glick H, et al. . Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside clinical trials II-An ISPOR good research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2015;18:161–72 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.001
    1. Faria R, Gomes M, Epstein D, et al. . A guide to handling missing data in cost-effectiveness analysis conducted within randomised controlled trials. Pharmacoeconomics 2014;32:1157–70.10.1007/s40273-014-0193-3
    1. Sterne JA, White IR, Carlin JB, et al. . Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ 2009;338:b2393–60.10.1136/bmj.b2393
    1. Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A. Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata Volume I: continouos responses. Texas: Stata Press, 2012.
    1. Bachmann MO, Fairall L, Clark A, et al. . Methods for analyzing cost effectiveness data from cluster randomized trials. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2007;5:12.10.1186/1478-7547-5-12
    1. Initial business case for the dissemination of telemedicine in Denmark.. 2015.
    1. Region ND. Service catalogue for TeleCare North. 4th edition2016.
    1. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions ? A discrete choice analysis. by Nancy Devlin and David Parkin Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series does NICE have a cost effectiveness threshold and. Health Econ 2004;13:437–52.
    1. Gomes M, Díaz-ordaz K, Grieve R, et al. . Missing Data in Cost-effectiveness analyses an application to Cluster Randomized Trials.. 2013:15–17.
    1. Andridge RR. Quantifying the impact of fixed effects modeling of clusters in multiple imputation for cluster randomized trials. Biom J 2011;53:57–74.10.1002/bimj.201000140
    1. Nixon RM, Thompson SG. Methods for incorporating covariate adjustment, subgroup analysis and between-centre differences into cost-effectiveness evaluations. Health Econ 2005;14:1217–29.10.1002/hec.1008
    1. Gomes M, Ng ES, Grieve R, et al. . Developing appropriate methods for cost-effectiveness analysis of cluster randomized trials. Med Decis Making 2012;32:350–61.10.1177/0272989X11418372
    1. Mannino DM, Buist AS. Global burden of COPD: risk factors, prevalence, and future trends. Lancet 2007;370:765–73.10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61380-4
    1. Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández JL, et al. . 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:f1035.10.1136/bmj.f1035
    1. Stoddart A, van der Pol M, Pinnock H, et al. . Telemonitoring for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cost and cost-utility analysis of a randomised controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare 2015;21:108–18.10.1177/1357633X14566574
    1. McDowell JE, McClean S, FitzGibbon F, et al. . A randomised clinical trial of the effectiveness of home-based health care with telemonitoring in patients with COPD. J Telemed Telecare 2015;21:80–7.10.1177/1357633X14566575
    1. van Asselt AD, van Mastrigt GA, Dirksen CD, et al. . How to deal with cost differences at baseline. Pharmacoeconomics 2009;27:519–28.10.2165/00019053-200927060-00007
    1. Manca A, Hawkins N, Sculpher MJ. Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility. Health Econ 2005;14:487–96.10.1002/hec.944
    1. The Danish Agency for Digitilisation. The National Action Plan for Dissemination of Telemedicine [Internet] 2012.
    1. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation: Publications Sage, 1997.
    1. Salisbury C, Thomas C, O’Cathain A, et al. . TElehealth in CHronic disease: mixed-methods study to develop the TECH conceptual model for intervention design and evaluation. BMJ Open 2015;5:e00644810.1136/bmjopen-2014-006448
    1. Dixon P, Hollinghurst S, Ara R, et al. . Cost-effectiveness modelling of telehealth for patients with raised cardiovascular disease risk: evidence from a cohort simulation conducted alongside the Healthlines randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2016;6:e01235510.1136/bmjopen-2016-012355
    1. Dixon P, Hollinghurst S, Edwards L, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with depression: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial. BJPsych Open 2016;2:262–9.10.1192/bjpo.bp.116.002907

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel