Cited by 156Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Cost Comparison Between Telemonitoring and Usual Care of Heart Failure: A Systematic Review

Seto, Emily·2008·Telemedicine and e-Health

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is associated with high direct and indirect costs to the patients and the healthcare system. This systematic review aims to analyze existing economic data to determine whether telemonitoring of patients with HF will result in decreased costs. The Scopus and PubMed databases were searched independently by two reviewers for journal articles that reported on an economic analysis (i.e., calculated monetary amounts or percentage change in costs) of a study using a HF telemonitoring system. Only articles describing telemonitoring systems with a component of home physiological measurements were included. Eleven articles met the inclusion criteria, describing 10 different HF telemonitoring systems. Nine of the 10 studies analyzed the direct costs to the healthcare system. All the studies found cost reductions from telemonitoring compared to usual care, which ranged between 1.6% and 68.3%. Cost reductions were mainly attributed to reduced hospitalization expenditures. Only one study discussed the impact of HF telemonitoring on direct patient costs. The study found a 3.5% lower travel cost for patients using telemonitoring compared to those in the usual care group. The single study that was found for indirect costs described the willingness to pay for telemedicine by patients with HF (55% of the patients with HF were willing to pay $20 to access telemedicine, and 19% were willing to pay $40). Available data from existing studies suggest that although HF telemonitoring will require an initial financial investment, it will substantially reduce costs in the long term, particularly by reducing rehospitalization and travel costs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/tmj.2007.0114

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Seto, E.
Affiliations
University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Seto, Emily
Venue
Telemedicine and e-Health
Published
2008-09
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
679-686
ISSN
  • 1530-5627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-3669
OpenAlex
W1996071954
Cited by
156
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 17
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Telemedicine Journal and e-Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
heart failure, remote patient monitoring, cost comparison, usual care, hospital costs, hospital readmission, travel cost, willingness to pay, telemedicine, health care costs
MeSH terms
Canada, Heart Failure, Humans, Monitoring, Physiologic, Ontario, Cost Savings, Health Care Costs, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review