The relative cost of outpatient telemedicine services.

J Stensland, S M Speedie, M Ideker, J House, T Thompson
{"title":"The relative cost of outpatient telemedicine services.","authors":"J Stensland,&nbsp;S M Speedie,&nbsp;M Ideker,&nbsp;J House,&nbsp;T Thompson","doi":"10.1089/107830299311998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compares the costs of offering outpatient care to primarily orthopedic and dermatology patients via live, interactive telemedicine to the estimated costs of direct face-to-face care for the same patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A simple, yet detailed methodology was used to evaluate the cost of adding telemedicine to a health care delivery system, using a \"hub-and-spoke\" model located in Minnesota. The costs and cost savings of telemedicine were evaluated from the perspectives of patients, providers, insurers, employers, and society as a whole. Sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the impact of various factors on the model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The variable cost of a telemedicine referral was $144, versus an estimated face-to-face referral cost of $183. Reductions in patient travel costs and in lost employee productivity were the principal benefits of the system. The break-even point, where total costs equal total cost savings, equalled 1,449 consultations annually. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the breakeven point varies from a low of 152 telemedicine consultations for a \"best case\" scenario to no possible breakeven point for a \"worst case\" scenario.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>At the system's current level of 300 consultations per year, the telemedicine system is estimated to add $45,000 to society's costs of providing medical care for these patients. The additional cost is primarily due to personnel expenses and an increase in the volume of specialty care. Patients see specialists more often due to improved access to care and lower transportation costs. Providers bear the cost while patients and employers enjoy substantial savings.</p>","PeriodicalId":79734,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","volume":"5 3","pages":"245-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/107830299311998","citationCount":"52","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/107830299311998","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52

Abstract

Objective: This study compares the costs of offering outpatient care to primarily orthopedic and dermatology patients via live, interactive telemedicine to the estimated costs of direct face-to-face care for the same patients.

Materials and methods: A simple, yet detailed methodology was used to evaluate the cost of adding telemedicine to a health care delivery system, using a "hub-and-spoke" model located in Minnesota. The costs and cost savings of telemedicine were evaluated from the perspectives of patients, providers, insurers, employers, and society as a whole. Sensitivity analysis was used to investigate the impact of various factors on the model.

Results: The variable cost of a telemedicine referral was $144, versus an estimated face-to-face referral cost of $183. Reductions in patient travel costs and in lost employee productivity were the principal benefits of the system. The break-even point, where total costs equal total cost savings, equalled 1,449 consultations annually. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the breakeven point varies from a low of 152 telemedicine consultations for a "best case" scenario to no possible breakeven point for a "worst case" scenario.

Conclusions: At the system's current level of 300 consultations per year, the telemedicine system is estimated to add $45,000 to society's costs of providing medical care for these patients. The additional cost is primarily due to personnel expenses and an increase in the volume of specialty care. Patients see specialists more often due to improved access to care and lower transportation costs. Providers bear the cost while patients and employers enjoy substantial savings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
门诊远程医疗服务的相对成本。
目的:本研究比较了通过实时、交互式远程医疗为骨科和皮肤科患者提供门诊护理的成本与为相同患者提供直接面对面护理的估计成本。材料和方法:采用了一种简单而详细的方法来评估将远程医疗添加到医疗保健提供系统中的成本,该方法使用的是位于明尼苏达州的“中心辐射型”模型。从患者、提供者、保险公司、雇主和整个社会的角度评估远程医疗的成本和成本节约。采用敏感性分析考察各因素对模型的影响。结果:远程医疗转诊的可变成本为144美元,而面对面转诊的估计成本为183美元。该系统的主要好处是减少了病人的旅行费用和员工的生产力损失。盈亏平衡点,即总费用等于节省的总费用,相当于每年1 449次咨询。敏感性分析表明,盈亏平衡点从“最佳情况”下152次远程医疗咨询的低点到“最坏情况”下没有可能的盈亏平衡点不等。结论:在该系统目前每年300次咨询的水平上,远程医疗系统估计为这些患者提供医疗保健的社会成本增加了45,000美元。增加的费用主要是由于人事费用和专业护理数量的增加。由于获得护理的便利和交通费用的降低,病人更常去看专科医生。医疗服务提供者承担费用,而患者和雇主则享受可观的节省。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Additional Abstract from the American Telemedicine Association's Fifth Annual Meeting May 21-24, 2000, Phoenix, Arizona. Behavioral Telemedicine: A New Approach to the Continuous Nonintrusive Monitoring of Activities of Daily Living Specialist–Primary Care Provider–Patient Communication in Telemedical Consultations Editorial: Telemedicine Nomenclature: What Does It Mean? Patient Satisfaction with Telemedicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1