Cost-Effectiveness of Telemedicine in Remote Orthopedic Consultations: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine consultations using real-time videoconferencing has the potential to improve access and quality of care, avoid patient travels, and reduce health care costs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of an orthopedic videoconferencing service between the University Hospital of North Norway and a regional medical center in a remote community located 148 km away. METHODS: An economic evaluation based on a randomized controlled trial of 389 patients (559 consultations) referred to the hospital for an orthopedic outpatient consultation was conducted. The intervention group (199 patients) was randomized to receive video-assisted remote orthopedic consultations (302 consultations), while the control group (190 patients) received standard care in outpatient consultation at the hospital (257 consultations). A societal perspective was adopted for calculating costs. Health outcomes were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Resource use and health outcomes were collected alongside the trial at baseline and at 12 months follow-up using questionnaires, patient charts, and consultation records. These were valued using externally collected data on unit costs and QALY weights. An extended sensitivity analysis was conducted to address the robustness of the results. RESULTS: This study showed that using videoconferencing for orthopedic consultations in the remote clinic costs less than standard outpatient consultations at the specialist hospital, as long as the total number of patient consultations exceeds 151 per year. For a total workload of 300 consultations per year, the annual cost savings amounted to €18,616. If costs were calculated from a health sector perspective, rather than a societal perspective, the number of consultations needed to break even was 183. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that providing video-assisted orthopedic consultations to a remote clinic in Northern Norway, rather than having patients travel to the specialist hospital for consultations, is cost-effective from both a societal and health sector perspective. This conclusion holds as long as the activity exceeds 151 and 183 patient consultations per year, respectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00616837; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00616837 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/762dZPoKX).

Patient reported outcomes with remote orthopaedic consultations by telemedicine: A randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Decentralised services through outreach clinics or modern technology reduce patient travel time and cost to society. Telemedicine consultation through videoconference is one such modality. Here, we compared patient-reported health outcomes and satisfaction between video-assisted remote and standard face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial included two parallel groups: (1) patients receiving video-assisted remote consultation at a regional medical centre (RMC); and (2) patients receiving standard consultation at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic of the University Hospital of North Norway (UNN). This study included patients referred to or scheduled for a consultation at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic. After each consultation, patient satisfaction was determined using patient-completed questionnaires containing questions on patient-reported health (three-level European quality of life five-dimension index (EQ-5D-3L)/European quality of life visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS)) and questions from a validated OutPatient Experiences Questionnaire (OPEQ). RESULTS: This study included 389 patients, of which 199 received remote consultation and 190 received standard consultation (total of 559 consultations). In all, 99% RMC-randomised patients and 99% UNN-randomised patients evaluated the consultation as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Moreover, 86% RMC-randomised patients preferred video-assisted consultation as the next consultation. No difference was observed in patient-reported health after 12 months between the two groups. EQ-5D index scores were 0.77 and 0.75 for RMC- and UNN-randomised patients, respectively (p = 0.42). DISCUSSION: We did not observe any difference in patient-reported satisfaction and health (EQ-5D/EQ-VAS) between video-assisted and standard consultations, suggesting that video-assisted remote consultation can be safely offered to some orthopaedic patients. Moreover, a significantly high proportion of patients selected video-assisted remote consultation as their next consultation, thus strengthening the findings of this study. However, economic aspects should be assessed before widely recommending video-assisted consultation.

Quality of care for remote orthopaedic consultations using telemedicine: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Decentralised services using outreach clinics or modern technology are methods to reduce both patient transports and costs to the healthcare system. Telemedicine consultations via videoconference are one such modality. Before new technologies are implemented, it is important to investigate both the quality of care given and the economic impact from the use of this new technology. The aim of this clinical trial was to study the quality of planned remote orthopaedic consultations by help of videoconference. METHOD: We performed a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with two parallel groups: video-assisted remote consultations at a regional medical centre (RMC) as an intervention versus standard consultation in the orthopaedic outpatient clinic at the University Hospital of North Norway (UNN) as a control. The participants were patients referred to or scheduled for a consultation at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic. The orthopaedic surgeons evaluated each consultation they performed by completing a questionnaire. The primary outcome measurement was the difference in the sum score calculated from this questionnaire, which was evaluated by the non-inferiority of the intervention group. The study design was based on the intention to treat principle. Ancillary analyses regarding complications, the number of consultations per patient, operations, patients who were referred again and the duration of consultations were performed. RESULTS: Four-hundred patients were web-based randomised. Of these, 199 (98 %) underwent remote consultation and 190 (95 %) underwent standard consultation. The primary outcome, the sum score of the specialist evaluation, was significantly lower (i.e. 'better') at UNN compared to RMC (1.72 versus 1.82, p = 0.0030). The 90 % confidence interval (CI) for the difference in score (0.05, 0.17) was within the non-inferiority margin. The orthopaedic surgeons involved evaluated 98 % of the video-assisted consultations as 'good' or 'very good'. In the ancillary analyses, there was no significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the argument that it is safe to offer video-assisted consultations for selected orthopaedic patients. We did not find any serious events related to the mode of consultation. Further assessments of the economic aspects and patient satisfaction are needed before we can recommend its wider application. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00616837.