Cost-effectiveness of noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure: health economic analysis of the TIM-HF2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive remote patient management (RPM) in patients with heart failure (HF) has been shown to reduce the days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause mortality in the Telemedical Interventional Management in Heart Failure II trial (TIM-HF2). The health economic implications of these findings are the focus of the present analyses from the payer perspective. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1538 participants of the TIM-HF2 randomized controlled trial were assigned to the RPM and Usual Care group. Health claims data were available for 1450 patients (n = 715 RPM group, n = 735 Usual Care group), which represents 94.3% of the original TIM-HF2 patient population, were linked to primary data from the study documentation and evaluated in terms of the health care cost, total cost (accounting for intervention costs), costs per day alive and out of hospital (DAOH), and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The average health care costs per patient year amounted to € 14,412 (95% CI 13,284-15,539) in the RPM group and € 17,537 (95% CI 16,179-18,894) in the UC group. RPM led to cost savings of € 3125 per patient year (p = 0.001). After including the intervention costs, a cost saving of € 1758 per patient year remained (p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: The additional noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with HF was cost-effective compared to standard care alone, since such intervention was associated with overall cost savings and superior clinical effectiveness.

Stratified prevention: opportunities and limitations. Report on the 1st interdisciplinary cardiovascular workshop in Augsburg.

Sufficient exercise and sleep, a balanced diet, moderate alcohol consumption and a good approach to handle stress have been known as lifestyles that protect health and longevity since the Middle Age. This traditional prevention quintet, turned into a sextet by smoking cessation, has been the basis of the "preventive personality" that formed in the twentieth century. Recent analyses of big data sets including genomic and physiological measurements have unleashed novel opportunities to estimate individual health risks with unprecedented accuracy, allowing to target preventive interventions to persons at high risk and at the same time to spare those in whom preventive measures may not be needed or even be harmful. To fully grasp these opportunities for modern preventive medicine, the established healthy life styles require supplementation by stratified prevention. The opportunities of these developments for life and health contrast with justified concerns: A "surveillance society", able to predict individual behaviour based on big data, threatens individual freedom and jeopardises equality. Social insurance law and the new German Disease Prevention Act (Präventionsgesetz) rightly stress the need for research to underpin stratified prevention which is accessible to all, ethical, effective, and evidence based. An ethical and acceptable development of stratified prevention needs to start with autonomous individuals who control and understand all information pertaining to their health. This creates a mandate for lifelong health education, enabled in an individualised form by digital technology. Stratified prevention furthermore requires the evidence-based development of a new taxonomy of cardiovascular diseases that reflects disease mechanisms. Such interdisciplinary research needs broad support from society and a better use of biosamples and data sets within an updated research governance framework.

[Social medicine and healthcare economics. The framework for future forms of healthcare]. / Sozialmedizin und Gesundheitsökonomie : Der Bedingungsrahmen zukünftiger Versorgungsformen.

In the political debate, even in academia, the concepts of "profitability" or "efficiency" are thrown around very robustly and freely with no regard for the players themselves. Economically speaking there can be no efficiency without a definition of targets in terms of outcomes and their level of quality. If even the government's Council of Economic Experts itself finds in its assessment of hospital funding that the "reform's target parameters - improving the profitability of service provision - have developed positively", but adds that "whether this also applies to the quality of services provided or to the realisation of healthcare outcomes remains to be seen due to the lack of evidence" [21], this indicates a one-sided and problematic curtailment of the concept even by highly competent bodies. Economic control of new forms of healthcare by means of prices and fees for clearly defined services is a complex problem that has not been dealt with adequately. All pricing is based on classification models aimed at ensuring cost and benefit clusters that are as homogeneous as possible. Classification models in healthcare as a basis for price control targets need constant adjusting to ensure accuracy of mapping and appropriateness to performance. A prerequisite for the methodology behind price control models of this kind is presupposing a responsible, rule-bound and criteria-based handling of "variance" and "coincidence" by means of risk-adjusted quality and price systems. They will define the character of a wide range of steering tools and have an effect that goes beyond the narrow formal confines of the sector. That is why the regulatory framework will need first and foremost to define a qualitative framework for the political "security infrastructure" by means of deregulated economic processes in which price control becomes accountable and is justified in terms of content.