Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41299270›Full record

SynthesisBMC geriatrics2025

The cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction of telehealth in geriatric care: a systematic review.

Alaka Chandak, Jenni Gudapati, Priyadarshini Bhalchandra Kulkarni

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors.

Alaka ChandakSymbiosis Institute of Health Sciences (SIHS) & Director, Symbiosis Centre of Health Care, SCHC, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune, Maharashtra, 411004, India. dralaka@sihs.edu.in.
Jenni GudapatiBoise State University, 1548 S Boulder View Ln, Boise, ID, 83712, USA.
Priyadarshini Bhalchandra KulkarniSymbiosis University Hospital and Research Centre (SUHRC), Lavale Hill Base, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth offers promising solutions to healthcare challenges in older adults, particularly in those with mobility constraints or limited access. However, the evidence regarding its cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction remains unclear.

objectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction of telehealth interventions in adults aged ≥ 65, with a focus on those aged ≥ 80.

methodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies published between 2013 and 2024. The inclusion criteria focused on primary studies assessing the impact of telehealth on cost and satisfaction in geriatric care. Quality appraisal was performed using Cochrane, NOS, and CASP tools.

resultsTen studies met inclusion criteria (1 RCT, 2 observational studies, 7 reviews). Telehealth interventions reduced costs by USD 223-3,846 per event, with up to 94% savings in low-income settings. Satisfaction was generally high and comparable to in-person care. Older adults aged ≥ 80 faced more barriers due to digital literacy and usability challenges.

conclusionTelehealth is a potentially cost-effective and acceptable approach for geriatric care. However, broader implementation requires inclusive design, digital support, and further empirical evidence, particularly in underserved populations.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisGeriatricsPatient SatisfactionTelemedicineAgedAged, 80 and overHumansCost-effectivenessDonabedian frameworkGeriatric careHealthcare accessOlder adultsPatient satisfactionTechnology acceptance modelTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID41299270
PMCPMC12659148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.