Evaluación económica e impacto presupuestario de un procedimiento de telemedicina para el control de calidad de las espirometrías en atención primaria / Economic Assessment and Budgetary Impact of a Telemedicine Procedure and Spirometry Quality Control in the Primary Care Setting

OBJETIVO: Evaluar el impacto económico de un sistema de telemedicina en un sistema público de salud para la mejora de la calidad de las espirometrías (espirometrías forzadas [EF]) en atención primaria. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se ha evaluado el impacto económico de 9.039 EF realizadas en 51 centros de salud (2010-2013) mediante teleespirometría (TE) comparándose con el sistema habitual. RESULTADOS: El sistema de TE encarece el coste unitario de la EF (47,8 € vs. 39,7 €) (2013), pero logra una mejora en la calidad de las mismas (un 84% con buena calidad, frente a un 61% mediante el procedimiento habitual). El coste total de la TE ha sido de 431.974 € (358.306 € por sistema habitual), lo que supone un impacto económico de 73.668 € (2013). El aumento de gasto para EF de buena calidad realizadas con TE fue de 34.030 € (2010) y de 144.295 € (2013), mientras que para las pruebas con mala calidad fue de -15.525€ (2010) y de -70.627€ (2013). CONCLUSIÓN: Del análisis coste-efectividad se concluye que la TE es un 23% más costosa y un 46% más efectiva. Asimismo, el gasto sanitario es menor a medida que el número de EF realizadas mediante TE aumenta. La no realización de EF de mala calidad, no válidas, supone un ahorro que compensa el aumento del gasto por la realización mediante TE, siendo un sistema coste-efectivo

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact of a telemedicine procedure designed to improve the quality of lung function testing (LFT) in primary care in a public healthcare system, compared with the standard method. Materials and methods: The economic impact of 9,039 LFTs performed in 51 health centers (2010-2013) using telespirometry (TS) compared to standard spirometry (SS) was studied. RESULTS: TS costs more per unit than SS (€47.80 vs. €39.70) (2013), but the quality of the TS procedure is superior (84% good quality, compared to 61% using the standard procedure). Total cost of TS was €431,974 (compared with €358,306€ for SS), generating an economic impact of €73,668 (2013). The increase in cost for good quality LFT performed using TS was €34,030 (2010) and €144,295 (2013), while the costs of poor quality tests fell by €15,525 (2010) and 70,627€ (2013). CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness analysis concludes that TS is 23% more expensive and 46% more effective. Healthcare costs consequently fall as the number of LFTs performed by TS rises. Avoiding poor quality, invalid LFTs generates savings that compensate for the increased costs of performing LFTs with TS, making it a cost-effective method

Economic Assessment and Budgetary Impact of a Telemedicine Procedure and Spirometry Quality Control in the Primary Care Setting.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the economic impact of a telemedicine procedure designed to improve the quality of lung function testing (LFT) in primary care in a public healthcare system, compared with the standard method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The economic impact of 9,039 LFTs performed in 51 health centers (2010-2013) using telespirometry (TS) compared to standard spirometry (SS) was studied. RESULTS: TS costs more per unit than SS (€47.80 vs. €39.70) (2013), but the quality of the TS procedure is superior (84% good quality, compared to 61% using the standard procedure). Total cost of TS was €431,974 (compared with €358,306€ for SS), generating an economic impact of €73,668 (2013). The increase in cost for good quality LFT performed using TS was €34,030 (2010) and €144,295 (2013), while the costs of poor quality tests fell by €15,525 (2010) and 70,627€ (2013). CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness analysis concludes that TS is 23% more expensive and 46% more effective. Healthcare costs consequently fall as the number of LFTs performed by TS rises. Avoiding poor quality, invalid LFTs generates savings that compensate for the increased costs of performing LFTs with TS, making it a cost-effective method.