Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34894273›Full record

Trial reportClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2022

Cost-effectiveness of noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure: health economic analysis of the TIM-HF2 trial.

Hanna Sydow, Sandra Prescher, Friedrich Koehler, Kerstin Koehler, Marc Dorenkamp, Sebastian Spethmann, Benjamin Westerhoff, Christoph J Wagner, Sebastian Liersch, Herbert Rebscher and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Hanna SydowDivision of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstr. 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany. hanna.sydow@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9116-9204
Sandra PrescherCentre for Cardiovascular Telemedicine, Medical Department, Division of Cardiology and Angiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Friedrich KoehlerCentre for Cardiovascular Telemedicine, Medical Department, Division of Cardiology and Angiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Kerstin KoehlerCentre for Cardiovascular Telemedicine, Medical Department, Division of Cardiology and Angiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Marc DorenkampDepartment of Cardiology (Campus Virchow-Klinikum), Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian SpethmannDepartment of Cardiology and Angiology (Campus Charité Mitte), Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Benjamin WesterhoffBARMER, Wuppertal, Germany.
Christoph J WagnerAOK Nordost-Die Gesundheitskasse, Health Services Management, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian LierschAOK Nordost-Die Gesundheitskasse, Health Services Management, Berlin, Germany.
Herbert RebscherIGVresearch-Institut für Gesundheitsökonomie und Versorgungsforschung, Hamburg, Germany.
Stefanie Wobbe-RibinskiDAK Gesundheit, Health Services Research and Innovation, Hamburg, Germany.
Heike RindfleischInternal Medicine with Gastroenterology and Nephrology (CC 13), Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Falk Müller-RiemenschneiderDivision of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstr. 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Stefan N WillichDivision of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstr. 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Thomas ReinholdDivision of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstr. 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

bundesministerium für bildung, wissenschaft, forschung und technologie 13KQ0904Abundesministerium für bildung, wissenschaft, forschung und technologie 13KQ0904Bbundesministerium für bildung, wissenschaft, forschung und technologie 13KQ1104A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoninvasive remote patient management (RPM) in patients with heart failure (HF) has been shown to reduce the days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause mortality in the Telemedical Interventional Management in Heart Failure II trial (TIM-HF2). The health economic implications of these findings are the focus of the present analyses from the payer perspective. METHODS AND

resultsA total of 1538 participants of the TIM-HF2 randomized controlled trial were assigned to the RPM and Usual Care group. Health claims data were available for 1450 patients (n = 715 RPM group, n = 735 Usual Care group), which represents 94.3% of the original TIM-HF2 patient population, were linked to primary data from the study documentation and evaluated in terms of the health care cost, total cost (accounting for intervention costs), costs per day alive and out of hospital (DAOH), and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The average health care costs per patient year amounted to € 14,412 (95% CI 13,284-15,539) in the RPM group and € 17,537 (95% CI 16,179-18,894) in the UC group. RPM led to cost savings of € 3125 per patient year (p = 0.001). After including the intervention costs, a cost saving of € 1758 per patient year remained (p = 0.048).

conclusionThe additional noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with HF was cost-effective compared to standard care alone, since such intervention was associated with overall cost savings and superior clinical effectiveness.

Indexed as

Heart FailureTelemedicineCost-Benefit AnalysisHealth Care CostsHospitalizationHumansQuality-Adjusted Life YearsCost-effectivenessHealth economicsHeart failureRemote patient managementTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34894273
PMCPMC9622523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.