Analysis of Healthcare Costs Incurred in Regional Hospitals in Andalusia (Spain) during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

(1) Background: The global health crisis caused by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to extreme overloading of different public healthcare systems worldwide. The Spanish Public Healthcare System is one of them. This study aimed to conduct a comparative cost analysis to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on small- and medium-sized regional hospitals in Andalusia (Spain). (2) Methods: This comparative, multicentre, observational, and retrospective study was designed to perform a comparative cost analysis between the Alto Guadalquivir Health Agency (AGHA) and Poniente University Hospital (PUH), both of which belong to the Spanish Public Health System (PHS). The data included in this study corresponds to the total costs by area and year incurred by the 61,335 patients from both healthcare institutions (AGHA = 36,110; PUH = 25,225) in the areas of hospital emergency service (HES), hospitalisation, and intensive care unit (ICU), during the 24 months of the study period (from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020). (3) Results: The analysis results showed a significant increase in costs incurred in 2020 for HES relative to those incurred in 2019 for both AGHA (+14%; p < 0.003) and PUH (+36%; p = 0.002). Additionally, costs incurred for ICU increased significantly in 2020 relative to those incurred in 2019 for both AGHA (+30%; p = 0.003) and PUH (+46%; p = 0.002). Hospitalisation costs for AGHA also increased significantly (+9%; p < 0.012) in 2020 versus those obtained in 2019; however, no significant differences were found for PUH (+6%; p = 1) in the same period analysed. However, the number of patients treated in the areas of HES, hospitalisation, and ICU was significantly reduced throughout 2020 compared to 2019. (4) Conclusions: Our findings show that the costs incurred during 2020 in the regional hospitals of Andalusia (Spain) increased significantly in most of the parameters analysed relative to those incurred in the year before the pandemic (i.e., 2019).

Teledermatology versus Face-to-Face Dermatology: An Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness from Eight Studies from Europe and the United States.

(1) Background: The aim of this systematic review was to compare the cost-effectiveness of two follow-up methods (face-to-face and telemedicine) used in dermatology in the last ten years. (2) Methods: A search for articles that included economic analyses was conducted in August 2021 in the databases PubMed, Medline, Scielo and Scopus using the following keywords: "Cost-Benefit Analysis", "Dermatology", "Telemedicine", "Primary Health Care", as well as other search terms and following the PICOS eligibility criteria. (3) Results: Three clinical trials and five observational studies were analyzed, providing information for approximately 16,539 patients (including four cost-minimization or saving analyses, three cost-effectiveness analyses, and one cost-utility analysis) in Europe and the United States. They describe the follow-up procedures in each of the cases and measure and analyze the direct and indirect costs and effectiveness. All the articles indicate that teledermatology lowers costs and proves satisfactory to both patients and professionals. (4) Conclusions: Although it has been found that follow-up via teledermatology can be more efficient than traditional hospital follow-up, more work is needed to establish evaluation protocols and procedures that measure key variables more equally and demonstrate the quality of the evidence of said studies.

Telemedicine in Times of the Pandemic Produced by COVID-19: Implementation of a Teleconsultation Protocol in a Hospital Emergency Department.

Since the first case of COVID-19 was reported in Spain, almost 22% of healthcare professionals have been infected. Among the main causes are exposure during the care of suspected patients and asymptomatic patients, which caused a greater lack of protection in some cases, and to the global shortage of personal protective equipment due to the strong demand for it. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a teleconsultation protocol with patients who had respiratory symptoms in the reduction of the consumption of personal protective equipment (PPE) in a hospital emergency service (HES) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a descriptive and retrospective study that analyzes the implementation of a teleconsultation protocol with patients with respiratory problems treated in the HES at the Hospital de Poniente (Almeria), between 18 March and 30 April 2020. In the selected study period, 5353 patients were treated in the HES of the Hospital de Poniente; of these, 15.43% showed respiratory symptoms and were referred to the Respiratory Circuit, of which 42.2% did so via teleconsultation. Sixty-six cases of COVID-19 were diagnosed, 57.6% were male, and the median age was 71 years old. The main disease related was pneumonia (89.4%), symptoms more frequent were cough (77.3%), fever (77.3%), and dyspnea (60.6%). Lastly, 56.1% of the patients that attended had one or more comorbidities, high blood pressure (53%), and diabetes (36.4%), which became the main risk factors. The results showed that the implementation of teleconsultation in the HES reduced the possibility of infection and allowed for a more efficient consumption of personal protective equipment.