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).

Comparative Analysis of Quality of Life of Patients with Dermatological Problems: Teledermatology Versus Face-to-Face Dermatology.

The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the patients cared for with teledermatology (TD) services was analyzed as compared with face-to-face dermatology (F-F/D) at the hospital. This study was a controlled, non-blinded, intra-level, and multicenter randomized clinical trial, with a 6-month follow-up. A total of 450 patients were randomly assigned to two different groups. The Spanish version of the generic EuroQol-5-dimensions-5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire and the specific Skindex-29 questionnaire were used at 0 and 6 months. The number of primary care visits (2.24 TD; 1.68 F-F/D) and number of hospital visits (0.01 TD; 1.48 F-F/D) were statistically significant. It was observed that from month 0 onwards, the users included in the F-F/D group self-perceived a lower HRQoL than the users included in the TD group (Skindex-29 total: p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L VAS = p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L utilities = p ≤ 0.00). At the end of the study, the patients included in the F-F/D group still obtained lower scores in their perception of HRQoL, as compared to those included in the other type of follow-up (Skindex-29 total: p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L VAS = p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L utilities = p ≤ 0.00). TD was an effective diagnosis and follow-up tool. At the end of the study period, the HRQoL of the patients in both groups was significantly higher as compared to their baseline levels. Additionally, both the general and specific HRQoL perceived by the TD patients was higher than the F-F/D group from the start of the study.

Patients' Experiences and Communication with Teledermatology versus Face-to-Face Dermatology.

(1) Background: Teledermatology (TD) has exponentially grown since the onset of COVID-19, as the Face-to-Face Dermatology (F-F/D) modality changed within Public Health Systems. Although studies have been conducted on health results, we did not find any that analyzed the experiences of individuals who received care through TD. Therefore, the main objective of the study was to analyze the experiences of dermatology patients and the communication with health personnel. (2) Methods: A multicenter, controlled, randomized, non-blinded clinical trial was designed. Data were collected during the six months of follow-up. Four-hundred and fifty patients participated in the present study, who were assigned to two different groups: TD and F-F/D. The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the participants were collected. The 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ) was used to assess patients' experiences, and the Healthcare Communication Questionnaire (HCCQ) was used to measure the communication of patients with healthcare professionals. (3) Results: After six months of follow-up, 450 patients completed the study (TD = 225; F-F/D = 225) of which 53.3% were women, with an average age of 52.16 (SD = 19.97). The main reasons for the consultations were skin lesions (51.56%) located on the head and neck (46.8%), followed by the legs (20.7%). According to the GS-PEQ, TD users indicated having a greater confidence in the professional skills of the doctors (p < 0.01). However, the F-F/D group indicated having received more adequate information about their diagnosis/afflictions (p < 0.01), were more involved in the decisions related to their treatment (p < 0.01), and more satisfied with the help and treatment received (p < 0.01). Regarding the HCCQ, the TD group obtained better assessments with respect to if the patients had been treated in a rude and hasty manner, if the health professionals had addressed them with a smile, and if these could adequately manage the reason for the consultation (p < 0.01). (4) Conclusions: The results of the study generally showed positive experiences and communication. The TD group indicated having received less information about the diagnosis, were less involved in the decisions, and were less satisfied with the help and treatment received. However, they indicated having more confidence on the professional skills of the doctors, and that the work at the institution was better organized. In addition, they perceived better communication skills of the health professionals, although less respect for their privacy.

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.

Correction: A non-randomized clinical trial to examine patients' experiences and communication during telemonitoring of pacemakers after five years follow-up.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261158.].

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Healthcare Activity in the Regional Hospitals of Andalusia (Spain).

(1) Background: The large global outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has overloaded the public health systems and reduced the regular healthcare activity, leading to a major health crisis. The main objective of this study was to carry out a comparative evaluation of the healthcare activities in the hospitals of Eastern Andalusia, Spain. (2) Methods: In this study, an observational, multicentered, and retrospective approach was adopted to compare the healthcare activities of the Poniente Hospital (PH) and the Alto Guadalquivir Health Agency (AGHA). Data was collected over a period of 24 months, i.e., from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020, and the variables evaluated were: patients seen in the hospital emergency service (HES), X-ray tests performed, patients cited in outpatient consultations, surgical interventions performed, and patients included in the waiting list. (3) Results: The analysis of the above-mentioned variables revealed a significant reduction in the number of patients registered in 2020 at HES as compared to that in 2019 for both PH (p = 0.002) and AGHA (p < 0.001). Moreover, the number of surgical interventions in 2020 was significantly reduced from that in 2019 for both PH (p = 0.001) and AGHA (p = 0.009). Moreover, for PH (p < 0.001), a significant reduction was observed in the waiting list admissions in 2020 compared to that in 2019; however, no significant difference in the waiting list admissions between the years 2020 and 2019 was observed for AGHA (p = 0.446). In 2020, the number of teleconsultations was significantly increased from that in 2019 for both PH (p < 0.001) and AGHA (p = 0.006). (4) Conclusion: The analysis carried out indicates that in 2020, compared to 2019, healthcare activity was significantly reduced in most of the parameters included in this study.

Economic impact and cost savings of teledermatology units compared to conventional monitoring at hospitals in southern Spain.

INTRODUCTION: Asynchronous teledermatology (TD) has undergone exponential growth in the past decade, allowing better diagnosis. Moreover, it saves both cost and time and reduces the number of visits involving travel and opportunity cost of time spent on visits to the hospital. The present study performed a cost-saving analysis of TD units and assessed whether they offered a cheaper alternative to conventional monitoring (CM) in hospitals from the perspective of public health-care systems (PHS) and patients. METHODS: This study was a retrospective assessment of 7030 patients. A cost-saving analysis comparing TD units to CM for patients at the Hospital de Poniente was performed over a period of one year. The TD network covered the Hospital de Poniente reference area (Spain) linked to 37 primary care (PC) centres that belonged to the Poniente Health District of Almeria. RESULTS: We observed a significant cost saving for TD units compared to participants in the conventional follow-up group. From the perspective of a PHS, there was a cost saving of 31.68% in the TD group (€18.59 TD vs. €27.20 CM) during the follow-up period. The number of CM visits to the hospital reduced by 38.14%. From the patients' perspective, the costs were lower, and the cost saving was 73.53% (€5.45 TD vs. €20.58 CM). DISCUSSION: The cost-saving analysis showed that the TD units appeared to be significantly cheaper compared to CM.

A non-randomized clinical trial to examine patients' experiences and communication during telemonitoring of pacemakers after five years follow-up.

Patients with pacemakers need regular follow-ups which are demanding. Telemonitoring for pacemaker can provide a new opportunity to avoid follow-up visits. On the other hand, in-person visits could help patients with pacemakers to cope better with the anxiety linked to their condition and maintain better communication with their doctors than simple remote control of their device status. Therefore, our objective was to analyze the experiences and communication comparing telemonitoring (TM) versus conventional monitoring (CM) of patients with pacemakers. A single-center, controlled, non-randomized, non-blinded clinical trial was designed. Data were collected five years after implantation in a cohort of 89 consecutive patients assigned to two different groups: TM and CM. The 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ) was used to assess patients' experiences, and the Healthcare Communication Questionnaire (HCCQ) was used to measure the communication of patients with healthcare professionals. Additionally, an ad-hoc survey including items from the 'Telehealth Patient Satisfaction Survey' and a 'costs survey' was used. After five years, 55 patients completed the study (TM = 21; CM = 34). Participants' mean (±SD) age was 81 (±6.47), and 31% were females. No differences in baseline characteristics between groups were found. The comparative analyses TM versus CM showed some significant differences. According to GS-PEQ, TM users received adequate information about their diagnosis or afflictions (p = .035) and the treatment was better adapted to their situation (p = .009). Both groups reported negative experiences regarding their involvement in their treatment decisions, the waiting time before admission, and perceived a low-benefit. According to HCCQ, the TM group experienced poorer consultation management by the healthcare provider (p = .041). Participants reported positive overall communication experiences. The study provides insights into the experiences and communication in PM monitoring services as well as specific areas where users reported negative experiences such as the consultation management by clinicians. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02234245.

Knowledge Update on the Economic Evaluation of Pacemaker Telemonitoring Systems.

(1) Introduction: In the last two decades, telemedicine has been increasingly applied to telemonitoring (TM) of patients with pacemakers; however, presently, its growth has significantly accelerated because of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has pushed patients and healthcare workers alike to seek new ways to stay healthy with minimal physical contact. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to update the current knowledge on the differences in the medium-and long-term effectiveness of TM and conventional monitoring (CM) in relation to costs and health outcomes. (2) Methods: Three databases and one scientific registry were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar), with no restrictions on language or year of publication. Studies published until July 2021 were included. The inclusion criteria were: (a) experimental or observational design, (b) complete economic evaluation, (c) patients with implanted pacemakers, and (d) comparison of TM with CM. Measurements of study characteristics (author, study duration, sample size, age, sex, major indication for implantation, and pacemaker used), analysis, significant results of the variables (analysis performed, primary endpoints, secondary endpoints, health outcomes, and cost outcomes), and further miscellaneous measurements (methodological quality, variables coded, instrument development, coder training, and intercoder reliability, etc.) were included. (3) Results: 11 studies met the inclusion criteria, consisting of 3372 enrolled patients; 1773 (52.58%) of them were part of randomized clinical trials. The mean age was 72 years, and the atrioventricular block was established as the main indication for device implantation. TM was significantly effective in detecting the presence or absence of pacemaker problems, leading to a reduction in the number of unscheduled hospital visits (8.34-55.55%). The cost of TM was up to 87% lower than that of CM. There were no significant differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the number of cardiovascular events. (4) Conclusions: Most of the studies included in this systematic review confirm that in the TM group of patients with pacemakers, cardiovascular events are detected and treated earlier, and the number of unscheduled visits to the hospital is significantly reduced, without affecting the HRQoL of patients. In addition, with TM modality, both formal and informal costs are significantly reduced in the medium and long term.

Long-term cost-utility analysis of remote monitoring of older patients with pacemakers: the PONIENTE study.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness studies on pacemakers have increased in the last years. However the number of long-term cost-utility studies is limited. The objective of this study was to perform a cost-utility analysis comparing remote monitoring (RM) versus conventional monitoring (CM) in hospital of older patients with pacemakers, 5 years after implant. METHODS: Under a controlled, not randomized, nor masked clinical trial, 83 patients with pacemakers were initially selected. After five years of follow-up, a total of 55 patients (CM = 34; RM = 21) completed the study. A cost-utility analysis of RM in terms of costs per gained quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was conducted. The costs from the Public Health System (PHS) as well as patients and their relatives were taken into account for the study. The robustness of the results was verified by the probabilistic analyses through Monte-Carlo simulations. RESULTS: After a five-year follow-up period, total costs were lower in the RM group by 23.02% than in the CM group (€274.52 versus €356.62; p = 0.033) because of a cost saving from patients' perspective (€59.05 versus €102.98; p = 0.002). However, the reduction of in-hospital visits derived from RM exhibited insignificant impact on the costs from the PHS perspective, with a cost saving of 15.04% (€215.48 vs. €253.64; p = 0.144). Costs/QALYs obtained by the RM group were higher as compared to the CM group, although there were no significant differences. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CM in comparison to RM became positive (€301.16). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms RM of older patients with pacemakers appears still as a cost-utility alternative to CM in hospital after 5 years of follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: (Identifier: NCT02234245 ). Registered 09 September 2014 - Prospectively registered.

Assessing Communication during Remote Follow-Up of Users with Pacemakers in Norway: The NORDLAND Study, a Randomized Trial.

As effective communication is a key ingredient for the provision of quality healthcare services, this study aimed to explore the communication experiences in the remote monitoring of older adults with a pacemaker. The study was based on a non-masked randomized observational design. The Healthcare Communication Questionnaire and in-depth interviews were conducted for data collection. A total of 49 patients participated in the study. The study findings reveal overall positive communication experiences by pacemaker users in remote monitoring with no significant differences from users in hospital monitoring. The remote option is perceived as safe and convenient, and communicating with the clinicians from home is considered comfortable and confidential. The study provides insights into the content of communication experiences in telehealth and practical implications in healthcare contexts. In a world that increasingly relies on remote communication, it is crucial to match technologies to patient needs and assess communication with patients. This will ensure the success of new models of care and establish appropriate criteria for the use of telehealth services. These criteria are all relevant in the implementation of health technology in the future as a part of effective patient-centered care.

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.

Long-Term Socioeconomic Impact of Informal Care Provided to Patients with Pacemakers: Remote vs. Conventional Monitoring.

The impact of informal care immediately after pacemaker (PM) implantation has been well established; however, not much is known about its long-term effects. The present study compared personal characteristics, associated problems, workloads, time, and costs related to informal care provided to patients with PM under remote monitoring (RM) vs. conventional monitoring (CM) in the hospital, five years after implantation. The PONIENTE study was a controlled, non-randomized or masked clinical trial conducted with information obtained from the perspective of informal caregivers. Data were collected at 12 and 60 months after PM implantation. The patients in the study were assigned to two different groups: remote monitoring (RM) and conventional monitoring (CM). The "Disability, personal autonomy, and dependency situations survey" (EDAD) was administered to collect information on sociodemographic characteristics, time, care difficulties, health status, professional aspects, and impact on economic, family, or leisure aspects of the main caregivers providing care to patients with pacemakers. After five years, 55 patients completed the study (RM = 21; CM = 34). The average age was 63.14 years (SD = 14.90), 96% of them were women, and the most predominant marital status was married (72%). Informal caregivers lived in the homes of the patients in 70% of cases, and 88% indicated that they had to provide care six to seven days a week. The average cost per patient during the monitoring period studied was 13.17% lower in the RM group than in the CM group, and these differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.35). This study found similar results in the two groups under study with respect to sociodemographic characteristics, workload, time, and problems associated with health, leisure and family members. The costs associated with care were higher in the CM group; however, these differences were not statistically significant.

Effectiveness and Safety in Remote Monitoring of Patients with Pacemakers Five Years after an Implant: The Poniente Study.

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and functional capacity values immediately after pacemaker (PM) implantation have been well established; however, not much has been known about its long-term effects. The present study compared the long-term effectiveness and safety of remote monitoring plus a clinic visit versus clinic visits alone during follow-up of adults implanted with PMs. This study was a single-centre, controlled, non-randomised, non-blinded clinical trial. Data were collected pre-implantation and after 60 months. The patients in the PONIENTE study were assigned to two different groups: remote monitoring (RM) and conventional monitoring (CM). The EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire was used to assess HRQoL and Duke Activity Status Index was used for the functional capacity. After five years, 55 patients completed the study (RM = 21; CM = 34). EuroQol-5D and functional capacity values were improved; however, significant differences were observed only in the EQ5D visual analogue scale (p < 0.001). Remote monitoring was equally feasible, reliable, safe, and clinically useful as CM. The frequencies of rehospitalisations and emergency visits did not differ between the groups. RM was found to be safe and effective in early detection and treatment of medical- and device-related events and in reducing hospital visits. Improved HRQoL was described not only immediately after PM implantation but also extended over a long time.

Cost-utility analysis of telemonitoring versus conventional hospital-based follow-up of patients with pacemakers. The NORDLAND randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study was to perform an economic assessment in order to check whether or not telemonitoring of users with pacemakers offers a cost-effective alternative to traditional follow-up in outpatient clinics. METHODS: We used effectiveness and cost data from the NORDLAND trial, which is a controlled, randomized, non-masked clinical trial. Fifty patients were assigned to receive either telemonitoring (TM; n = 25) or conventional monitoring (CM; n = 25) and were followed up for 12 months after the implantation. A cost-utility analysis was performed in terms of additional costs per additional Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) attained from the perspectives of the Norwegian National Healthcare System and patients and their caregivers. RESULTS: Effectiveness was similar between alternatives (TM: 0.7804 [CI: 0.6864 to 0.8745] vs. CM: 0.7465 [CI: 0.6543 to 0.8387]), while cost per patient was higher in the RM group, both from the Norwegian NHS perspective (TM: €2,079.84 [CI: 0.00 to 4,610.58] vs. €271.97 [CI: 158.18 to 385.76]; p = 0.147) and including the patient/family perspective (TM: €2,295.91 [CI: 0.00 to 4,843.28] vs. CM: €430.39 [CI: 0.00 to 4,841.48]), although these large differences-mainly due to a few patients being hospitalized in the TM group, as opposed to none in the CM group-did not reach statistical significance. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) from the Norwegian NHS perspective (€53,345.27/QALY) and including the patient/caregiver perspective (€55,046.40/QALY), as well as the Incremental Net Benefit (INB), favors the CM alternative, albeit with very broad 95%CIs. The probabilistic analysis confirmed inconclusive results due to the wide CIs even suggesting that TM was not cost-effective in this study. Supplemental analysis excluding the hospitalization costs shows positive INBs, whereby suggesting a discrete superiority of the RM alternative if hospitalization costs were not considered, albeit also with broad CIs. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-utility analysis of TM vs. CM shows inconclusive results because of broad confidence intervals with ICER and INB figures ranging from potential savings to high costs for an additional QALY, with the majority of ICERs being above the usual NHS thresholds for coverage decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237404.

Correction: Patients' experiences of remote communication after pacemaker implant: The NORDLAND study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218521.].

Patients' experiences of remote communication after pacemaker implant: The NORDLAND study.

BACKGROUND: The concept of 'patient experience' has become central to how to improve healthcare. Remote communication with patients is today a frequent practice in healthcare services, showing similar outcomes to standard outpatient care while enabling cost reduction in both formal and informal care. The purpose of this study was to analyse the experiences of people with telemonitoring pacemakers. METHODS: Patients were randomly allocated to either the telemonitoring or hospital monitoring follow-ups. Using the 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ), as well as an ad-hoc survey from the 'telehealth patient satisfaction survey' and 'costs survey', patients' experiences were measured six months after the pacemaker implant in a cohort of 50 consecutive patients. The mean age was 74.8 (± 11.75) years and 26 (52%) patients were male of which 1 was lost in follow-up. Finally, 24 patients were followed up with standard hospital monitoring, while 25 used the telemonitoring system. Differences in baseline characteristics between groups were not found. RESULTS: Findings showed overall positive and similar experiences in patients living with telemonitoring and hospital monitoring pacemakers. Significant differences were found in GS-PEQ concerning how telemonitoring patients received less information about their diagnosis/afflictions (p = 0.046). We did not find significant differences in other items such as 'confidence in the clinicians' professional skills', 'treatment perception adapted to their situation', 'involvement in decisions regarding the treatment', 'perception of hospital organisation', 'waiting before admission', 'satisfaction of help and treatment received', 'benefit received', and 'incorrect treatment'. CONCLUSIONS: The remote communication of pacemakers was met with positive levels of patients' experiences similarly to patients in the hospital monitoring follow-up. However, telemonitoring patients received less information. Thus, improving the quality and timing of information is required in telemonitoring patients in the planning and organisation of future remote communication healthcare services for people living with a pacemaker implant.

Telemonitoring and Quality of Life in Patients after 12 Months Following a Pacemaker Implant: the Nordland Study, a Randomised Trial.

The purpose of this study was to analyse the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients followed up using a remote device-monitoring system (TM) compared to patients followed up through standard outpatient visits (HM), 12 months after the implantation of a pacemaker. This was a trial design that used the EuroQol-5D Questionnaire and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF). The HRQoL of a cohort of 50 consecutive patients randomly allocated to one of the two follow-up modalities was measured at baseline and then during follow-up, 12 months after the pacemaker implantation. Eventually, 23 patients were followed-up through standard outpatient visits, while 23 used a remote monitoring system. Results: The baseline clinical characteristics and health-related quality of life of the patients from both groups were observed to be statistically similar. Twelve months after the pacemaker implantation, both groups showed statistically significant improvements in the baseline parameters based on the MLHF. The patients followed up through hospital visits showed a greater increase in MLHF-HRQoL after 12 months, although the increase was not significantly greater than that of the TM group. Furthermore, the frequencies of emergency visits and re-hospitalisations did not differ between the groups.

The Potential of Specialized Media in Public Health: Analysis of Health-Related Content in Sports Newspapers.

Sports-specialized newspapers are one of the print media with the highest number of readers in Spain. However, little is known about the health coverage in this type of print press. The aim of the study was to analyze any health-related material in sports newspaper coverage and describe the main characteristics. This is an observational and cross-sectional study, performed in relation to the three most read daily Spanish sports newspapers (MARCA, AS, SPORT). A descriptive analysis was conducted to assess the health-related materials selected after a careful search over a period of 30 days. During this time, a total of 815 units of analysis were identified. On average, 14.79% (n = 645 pages) of the full content (n = 4362) included health-related material. The Liga BBVA section was the most frequent to contain health-related content by a significant margin (p = 0.01). The main covered topics were injuries to soccer players (52%), doping (21%), and other diseases in athletes or their relatives (8.6%) with no significant differences (p = 0.10). Photographs (87.4%) were the most frequent visual material used in the health content, followed by infographics (12.6%). Press releases were the most frequent source of information (58%). Spanish sports newspapers include a high proportion of health-related material, especially in terms of providing detailed descriptions of athletes' sport injuries, mainly related to soccer.

Cost-utility analysis on telemonitoring of users with pacemakers: The PONIENTE study.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have confirmed the cost-saving of telemonitoring of users with pacemakers (PMs). The purpose of this controlled, non-randomised, non-masked clinical trial was to perform an economic assessment of telemonitoring (TM) of users with PMs and check whether TM offers a cost-utility alternative to conventional follow-up in hospital. METHODS: Eighty-two patients implanted with an internet-based transmission PM were selected to receive either conventional follow-up in hospital ( n = 52) or TM ( n = 30) from their homes. The data were collected during 12 months while patients were being monitored. The economic assessment of the PONIENTE study was performed as per the perspectives of National Health Service (NHS) and patients. A cost-utility analysis was conducted to measure whether the TM of patients with PMs is cost-effective in terms of costs per gained quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: There was a significant cost-saving for participants in the TM group in comparison with the participants in the conventional follow-up group. From the NHS's perspective, the patients in the TM group gained 0.09 QALYs more than the patients in the conventional follow-up group over 12 months, with a cost saving of 57.64% (€46.51 versus €109.79, respectively; p < 0.001) per participant per year. In-office visits were reduced by 52.49% in the TM group. The costs related to the patient perspective were lower in the TM group than in the conventional follow-up group (€31.82 versus €73.48, respectively; p < 0.005). The costs per QALY were 61.68% higher in the in-office monitoring group. DISCUSSION: The cost-utility analysis performed in the PONIENTE study showed that the TM of users with PMs appears to be a significant cost-effective alternative to conventional follow-up in hospital.