Skip to main content

Telemedicine Can Make Money for Tertiary Centers

May 3, 2012 (San Jose, California) — Providing services through telemedicine can make money for a tertiary medical center, researchers reported here at the American Telemedicine Association 17th Annual International Meeting.
After the deployment of telemedicine, pediatric transports increased by 142 patients per year at the University of California at Davis (UCD) Children's Hospital, resulting in a jump in hospital revenue of $1.6 million and in professional billing of $374,000, according to Madan Dharmar, MBBS, PhD, who is an assistant professor there.
"If you invest...by deploying telemedicine to a rural hospital, then your annual increase in hospital and professional revenue, based on the increase in the number of transfers, is quite substantial," said Dr. Dharmar.
Many studies have found benefits from technology, such as video cameras, that allows specialists to diagnose and treat patients who are far away. But most of this research has focused on patient and provider satisfaction or health outcomes.
Relatively few studies have examined cost effectiveness; the ones that have have looked at the issue from a variety of perspectives — patients, providers, and society as a whole.
"We have never talked about whether there is a benefit for a hospital to invest in telemedicine," said Dr. Dharmar. He and his colleagues were forced to look at the question when his department's video conferencing unit broke.
The department's chief administrative officer said the $15,000 to replace the unit was not in the department's budget.
"We had collected data where patients were very satisfied," Dr. Dharmar told Medscape Medical News. "We had data showing better provider satisfaction.... We had data showing better outcomes. The response was: 'It's not in the budget'."
So Dr. Dharmar and his colleagues set out to show that telemedicine could make money for the hospital. They evaluated 13 rural hospitals that had begun telemedicine relationships with their hospital in 2003.
They found that 2056 children were transferred to UCD Children's Hospital after telemedicine consultations began. The number per year increased from 143 to 285, and the average hospital revenue per year increased from $2.4 million to $4.0 million during that period, said Dr. Dharmar.
The researchers defined hospital revenue as total revenue resulting from the transferred patient minus direct costs related to that patient.
Still, the chief administrative officer pointed out that increased revenue for the hospital as a whole did not equate to revenue for the department.
So Dr. Dharmar and his colleagues looked further and found that average professional billing revenue increased from $314,000 to $688,000 per year. They defined professional billing revenue as the total reimbursement from insurance providers for the transferred patients.
The increased income from each hospital was about $23,000 per year, Dr. Dharmar said.
Even these figures did not convince the chief administrative officer to pay for the new unit out of the department budget, but the hospital as a whole finally picked up the tab, Dr. Dharmar said.
The study raised questions from session moderator Ricardo Muñoz, MD, chief of the cardiac intensive care unit at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania.
In the first place, the increase in transfers could be due to other factors. "How do you know it's telemedicine?" he asked.
Dr. Dharmar admitted that the data he has now don't answer that question. The researchers are looking at patients' zip codes to establish more clearly that the increased transfers came from hospitals that established new telemedicine relationships with UCD.
He thinks they will be able to show that association. "There are hospitals from which there were zero referrals before we started the telemedicine relationship; after we started the relationship, they started to transfer patients," he said.
That prompted Dr. Muñoz to raise another issue. Telemedicine is supposed to prevent the need for transfers by providing services remotely, he pointed out.
"In the ideal society, that's how it should work," Dr. Dharmar acknowledged. "But our healthcare system is broken and it depends on a fee for service. If a tertiary hospital invests in something like this, they have to make money off it."
Dr. Dharmar and Dr. Muñoz have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Comments

  1. A patient needs a doctor who truly listens to his or her patients, because a doctor who actually listens to the questions promotes an environment in which you feel capable of discussing the questions and concerns plaguing you.ask a doctor

    ReplyDelete
  2. Usually low bandwidth analog Plain Old Telephone System. Some newer systems do support higher bandwidth capabilities.
    Telemedicine System

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Antidepressants Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk in Kids

Pediatric patients who use antidepressants may have an elevated risk for type 2 diabetes, the authors of a new study report. In a retrospective cohort study of more than 119,000 youths 5 to 20 years of age, the risk for incident type 2 diabetes was nearly twice as high among current users of certain types of antidepressants as among former users, Mehmet Burcu, PhD, and colleagues report in an article  published online October 16 in  JAMA Pediatrics . The risk intensified with increasing duration of use, greater cumulative doses, and higher daily doses of these antidepressants. The findings point to a growing need for closer monitoring of these products, including greater balancing of risks and benefits, in the pediatric population, the authors caution. They undertook the study because, despite growing evidence of an association between antidepressant use and an increased risk for type 2 diabetes in adults, similar research in pediatric patients was scarce. "To our know...

Contact Precautions May Have Unintended Consequences

Contact precautions, including gloves, gowns, and isolated rooms, have helped stem the transmission of hospital pathogens but have also had some negative consequences, according to findings from a new study. Healthcare worker (HCWs) visited patients on contact precautions less frequently than other patients and spent less time with those patients when they did visit, report Daniel J. Morgan, MD, from the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the Veterans Affairs (VA) Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, and colleagues. Moreover, patients on contact precautions also received fewer outside visitors. "Less contact with HCWs suggests that other unintended consequences of contact precautions still exist," Dr. Morgan and coauthors write. "The resulting decrease in HCW contact may lead to increased adverse events and a lower quality of patient care due to less consistent patient monitoring and poorer adherence to standard adverse event prevention methods (such...

Missing Data Lead FDA Panel to Vote Against Rivaroxaban for ACS May 23, 2012 (Updated May 24, 2012) (Silver Spring, Maryland) — The missing data issues plaguing the ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 trial of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting, the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus clopidogrel, or ticlopidine. Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the ATLAS ACS TIMI 46 phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the risk of bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, but the studies were hindered by early patient withdrawals and missing data. We Don't Know What We're Missing Based on the ATLAS ACS 2 results, FDA reviewer Dr Karen Hicks recommended approval of rivaroxaban for the requested indications except all-cause mortality. However, another FDA reviewer, Dr Thomas Marciniak, was adamant that the trial results are not interpretable because about 12% of the patients had incomplete follow-up, far higher than the 1% to 1.5% differences in the end-point rates between rivaroxaban and placebo. A total of 1294 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, and the company was only able to contact 183, of which 177 were confirmed to be alive. Because of the patient dropouts, the company adopted a "modified intention-to-treat analysis," whereby patients were observed for 30 days after randomization or the global end date for the trial, instead of observing all the patients until the end of the trial as the FDA originally suggested. Marciniak criticized the sponsor's efforts to follow the patients and said that three patient deaths not counted in the modified intention-to-treat analysis may just be the "tip of the iceberg." Because the percentage of patients whose ultimate vital status remains unknown is much greater than the reported differences in mortality rates, the claimed mortality benefits are not reliable. The majority of the panel sided with Marciniak. For example, Dr Sanjay Kaul (University of California, Los Angeles) voted "no" because "there was enough uncertainty in the quality and robustness of the data that dissuaded me from voting yes. . . . The 'missingness' of the data doesn't invalidate it, but it certainly makes it hard to infer [the conclusion]." Dr Steven Nissen (Cleveland Clinic, OH) said that the decision to use the modified intention-to-treat analysis had a "profound impact" on the interpretability of the data. "It's saying we don't care what happens after 30 days, [and] that colored the trial in ways we couldn't recover from." Given the risk of major bleeding, "I want to see better evidence that this strategy of adding an Xa inhibitor or a direct thrombin inhibitor or something else to a good antiplatelet agent is robustly better for the patient," Nissen said. He recommends that the companies run a new trial of the 2.5 twice-daily dose of rivaroxaban using a strict intention-to-treat approach, but, he said, "I don't expect the death benefit to be too robust." Several panelists said they were concerned that the patients who dropped out of the trial were disproportionately likely to have a bleeding event, which led them to quit the trial, or a "protopathic" event, as statistician Dr Scott Emerson (University of Washington, Seattle) put it. "We're worried that an impending event is what is changing their behavior. We see that all the time in clinical trials--that regularly measured end points do not pick up [all of] the events," he said. He said that since the company was only able to contact 183 of the over 1200 patients who dropped out, it is possible that the dropouts skew the outcomes comparison of the trial. "Differential event rates after dropout are the number-one thing we're afraid of, so you have to explore it" in a statistical sensitivity analysis of the potential impact of these unknown outcomes. "It would not surprise me if, at the end of the day, these data did not hold up under a proper sensitivity analysis," he said. "What I want to know is, among the people who had events, how differential was the follow-up, but I can tell you by just looking at it, there was a very slightly different amount of follow-up of the people in the treatment arm. But I don't know whether everyone in the treatment arm was cured and they were trekking in the Himalayas and everyone in the placebo arm went home to die. I don't know that that's not the case." Dr Maury Krantz (University of Colorado, Denver) voted in favor of approval but said he does not know how rivaroxaban would perform in general clinical practice, especially when used with aspirin and clopidogrel. "I felt very much torn by this. This isn't a simple paradigm shift. It means going to triple therapy, which is really a three-headed monster in many ways. I think that what you're going to see in practice, if this is not done carefully with the proper labeling and secondary studies, is really dramatic magnification of bleeding and perhaps minimization of the efficacy benefit."

May 23, 2012   (Updated May 24, 2012)  (Silver Spring, Maryland)  —  The missing data issues plaguing the  ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51   trial of the factor Xa inhibitor  rivaroxaban  (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the  FDA  Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting , the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus  clopidogrel , or  ticlopidine . Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the  ATLAS ACS TIMI 46   phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the ri...