What are the Costs of Improving Access to Specialists through eConsultation? The Champlain BASE Experience
Open accessAbstract
Excessive wait times and poor access to care are among the most significant problems facing health care service delivery in Canada and beyond. We implemented the Champlain BASE eConsult service in the region of Ottawa, Canada to increase access to specialist care. We have collected ongoing utilization data and provider surveys over a three year period, providing a unique opportunity to explore the economic aspects of this multispecialty eConsult service. This is an economic evaluation from the perspective of the payer: the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care of Ontario. All eConsults submitted during April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2014 were included. We attributed cost savings only to those cases where an eConsult led to the avoidance of a face-to-face specialist visit. A total of 2606 eConsults directed to 27 different speciality groups were included. In 40.3% (n=1051) of cases processed, a face-to-face specialist visit was originally planned but avoided as a result of eConsult, while 29% led to a referral. The estimated cost per eConsult for Years 1, 2, and 3 were $131.05, $10.34, and $6.45 respectively. Results from a sensitivity analysis project that the eConsult service will break even once we reach 7818 eConsults. This is one of the first studies to examine costs across a multispecialty eConsult service. We saw a marked decrease in the cost per eConsult over each annual period. Future research is needed to identify and examine similar outcomes that may lead to cost savings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Other eConsult services are independent of individual health records and use secure web-based portals to link providers, such as Champlain BASE, TNMG, and KSYOS, or harness secure intranet e-mail such as AKO.
“Other eConsult services are independent of individual health records and use a secure web-based portals to link providers, such as the Champlain BASE in Canada, [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] TNMG in Brazil, [33][34][35][36] and KSYOS in The Netherlands, 37 or harness secure intranet e-mail as the means of communication, such as Army Knowledge Online (AKO).38”
From A Systematic Review of Asynchronous, Provider-to-Provider, Electronic Consultation Services to Improve Access to Specialty Care Available Worldwide (2019) · cites this paper as [22]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 21
- Authors
- Clare, L., Catherine, D. A., Paul, D., Ferdinand, M.-Y., Amir, A., & Erin, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Venue
- Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
- Publisher
- IOS Press
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 209
- Pages
- 67-74
- ISSN
- 0926-9630 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W413404106
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 12.69
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Studies in health technology and informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Keywords
- e-consultation, access to specialist care, waiting time, cost reduction, payer perspective, specialist referral, health care utilization
- MeSH terms
- Cost-Benefit Analysis, Health Services Accessibility, Medicine, Ontario, Health Care Costs, Remote Consultation, Quality Improvement
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