Implementing Technologies: Assessment of Telemedicine Experiments in the Paris Region: Reasons for Success or Failure of the Evaluations and of the Deployment of the Projects

Background: Telemedicine is increasingly viewed as a tool to provide a wide range of health services. This article presents policy lessons drawn from the evaluation of telemedicine experiments conducted in the Paris region. Methods: We used a mixed method design to study telemedicine projects commissioned by the Paris Regional Health Agency between 2013 and 2017. We combined data analysis of the telemedicine projects, review of the protocols, and interviews with stakeholders. Results: We identified the following reasons for disappointing outcomes: the outcome measure was requested too early during the experiments because payers required information for budgetary decisions; and the learning curve, technical problems, diversion of use, insufficient number of inclusions, and a lack of adherence prevented the demonstration of successful outcomes of the projects. Conclusion: The evaluation of telemedicine should be undertaken after sufficient uptake to ensure barriers to implementation are overcome, and to obtain the sample size necessary for statistical power and reduce the average cost for one telemedicine request. Randomized controlled trials should be encouraged with appropriate funding and the follow-up period should be extended

Implementing Technologies: Assessment of Telemedicine Experiments in the Paris Region: Reasons for Success or Failure of the Evaluations and of the Deployment of the Projects

Background: Telemedicine is increasingly viewed as a tool to provide a wide range of health services. This article presents policy lessons drawn from the evaluation of telemedicine experiments conducted in the Paris region. Methods: We used a mixed method design to study telemedicine projects commissioned by the Paris Regional Health Agency between 2013 and 2017. We combined data analysis of the telemedicine projects, review of the protocols, and interviews with stakeholders. Results: We identified the following reasons for disappointing outcomes: the outcome measure was requested too early during the experiments because payers required information for budgetary decisions; and the learning curve, technical problems, diversion of use, insufficient number of inclusions, and a lack of adherence prevented the demonstration of successful outcomes of the projects. Conclusion: The evaluation of telemedicine should be undertaken after sufficient uptake to ensure barriers to implementation are overcome, and to obtain the sample size necessary for statistical power and reduce the average cost for one telemedicine request. Randomized controlled trials should be encouraged with appropriate funding and the follow-up period should be extended

Effectiveness and efficiency of tele-expertise for improving access to retinopathy screening among 351 neonates in a secondary care center: An observational, controlled before-after study.

In France, secondary care hospitals encounter difficulties to adhere to retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening guidelines. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of a tele-expertise program for ROP screening in neonatal intensive care units without on-site ophthalmologists. We evaluated the impact of a tele-expertise program funded by the Paris Region Health Authority in a secondary care center general hospital of the Paris Region (CHSF), where there was previously no on-site ophthalmologist. We performed an observational, controlled before-after study, with a university tertiary care center with on-site ophthalmologists (Port-Royal) as the control group. Recruitment and data collection for both periods took place from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 31 2012, and from 1 January 2014 to 31 March 2015. The primary endpoint was the percentage of compliance with screening guidelines, secondary endpoints included pain scores and costs. Over the two periods, at total of 351 infants were recruited in the CHSF. Implementation of the tele-expertise resulted in an absolute +57.3% increase in the proportion of examinations realized in accordance with guidelines (3.8% during the "before" period and 61.1% during the "after" period, p<0.001). As compared with the control group, the proportion of infants appropriately screened improved (57.5% versus 43.1%, p = 0.002); median pain score on the acute pain rating scale for neonates during examination was significantly higher (median score 5.5/10, range [2.5-5.7] versus 2.0/10, range [1.0-3.1], p = 0.002). Screening rates in the control group remained unchanged. The average cost per examination increased from €337 in the "before" period to €353 in the "after period" in the tele-expertise group. The implementation of tele-expertise for ROP screening in the CHSF medical center resulted in a major improvement of access to care with a small cost increase. The issue of pain control during examination with tele-expertise should be further addressed

Cost-effectiveness of modified diagnostic strategy to safely rule-out pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: a non-inferiority cluster crossover randomized trial (MODIGLIA-NI)

Abstract Background The aim of this trial-based economic evaluation was to assess the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of the modified diagnostic strategy combining the YEARS rule and age-adjusted D-dimer threshold compared with the control (which used the age-adjusted D-dimer threshold only) for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE) in the Emergency Department (ED). Methods Economic evaluation from a healthcare system perspective alongside a non-inferiority, crossover, and cluster-randomized trial conducted in 16 EDs in France and two in Spain with three months of follow-up. The primary endpoint was the additional cost of a patient without failure of the diagnostic strategy, defined as venous thromboembolism (VTE) diagnosis at 3months after exclusion of PE during the initial ED visit. Mean differences in 3-month failure and costs were estimated using separate generalized linear-regression mixed models, adjusted for strategy type, period, and the interaction between strategy and period as fixed effects and the hospital as a random effect. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was obtained by dividing the incremental costs by the incremental frequency of VTE. Results Of the 1,414 included patients, 1,217 (86%) were analyzed in the per-protocol analysis (648 in the intervention group and 623 in the control group). At three months, there were no statistically significant differences in total costs (€-46; 95% CI: €-93 to €0.2), and the failure rate was non inferior in the intervention group (-0.64%, one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞ to 0.21%, non-inferiority margin 1.5%) between groups. The point estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicating that each undetected VTE averted in the intervention group is associated with cost savings of €7,142 in comparison with the control group. There was a 93% probability that the intervention was dominant. Similar results were found in the as randomized population. Conclusions Given the observed cost decrease of borderline significance, and according to the 95% confidence ellipses, the intervention strategy has a potential to lead to cost savings as a result of a reduction in the use of chest imaging and of the number of undetected VTE averted. Policy-makers should investigate how these monetary benefits can be distributed across stakeholders. Clinicaltrials Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04032769; July 25, 2019

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a telemedicine programme for preventing unplanned hospitalisations of older adults living in nursing homes: The GERONTACCESS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

International audienceAbstract OBJECTIVE: The GERONTACCESS trial evaluated the utility and cost-effectiveness of a gerontological telemedicine (TLM) programme for preventing unplanned hospitalisation of residents living in nursing homes (NHs) in regions lacking medical facilities (“medical deserts”). DESIGN: GERONTACCESS was a 12-month, multicentre, prospective cluster-randomised trial conducted in NHs. The intervention group underwent TLM assessments every 3 months. The control group received the usual care. In both groups, comprehensive on-site assessments were conducted at baseline and the final visit. Care requirements were documented throughout the study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: NH residents aged > 60 years with multiple chronic diseases. METHODS: The study outcomes were the proportion of patients who experienced avoidable and unplanned hospitalisation, and the incremental cost savings per quality-adjusted life years from baseline to the 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 426 randomised participants (mean ± standard deviation age, 87.2 ± 7.6 years; 311 [73.0%] women), 23.4% in the intervention group and 32.5% in the control group experienced unplanned hospitalisation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 0.97; p = 0.034). Each avoided hospitalisation in the intervention group saved $US 3,846. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The results of GERONTACCESS revealed that our gerontological, preventative TLM program significantly reduced unplanned hospitalisations. This innovative intervention limited disease progression and promoted a healthy lifestyle among NH residents. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02816177, registered June 28, 2016

Cost-Utility Analysis of Transarterial Radioembolization With Yttrium-90 Resin Microspheres Compared With Sorafenib in Locally Advanced and Inoperable Hepatocellular Carcinoma

International audiencePurpose: The SARAH (Sorafenib Versus Radioembolization in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01482442) did not show a significant survival benefit for patients treated with transarterial radioembolization (TARE) compared with continuous oral sorafenib. The improved toxicity profile of patients treated with TARE in the trial, however, could result in a quality of life benefit in economic evaluations. Our objective was to perform a cost-utility analysis of TARE versus sorafenib for locally advanced and inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods: This study used patient-level data of the SARAH trial regarding resource use, progression-free and overall survival, and quality of life for the within-trial period for the patients who received at least 1 dose of sorafenib or 1 treatment with TARE according to their randomization arm. Data were extrapolated by using a partitioned survival model that incorporated costs and health outcomes, measured in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).Findings: The use of TARE resulted in an average loss of 0.036 life-year and a gain of 0.006 QALY compared with sorafenib. The aerage cost for the TARE arm was €17,179 (95% CI, 9,926-24,280) higher than the sorafenib arm, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €3,153,086/QALY. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed a 50% risk that the TARE strategy was dominated. TARE was consistently dominated by sorafenib or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio more than €450,000/QALY in all sensitivity analyses.Implications: This economic evaluation of SARAH found that using radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma was not a cost-effective option at the usually accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds