Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Health Interventions for Asthma or COPD: Systematic Review

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2024

Authors

Ferreira, MAM (Author) Other; dos Santos, AF (Author) Other; Sousa Pinto, B (Author) FMUP; Taborda Barata, L (Author) Other

Journal

Title: Clinical and Experimental Allergy

ISSN: 0954-7894

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell

Indexing

ISI Web of Knowledge - 3 Citations

Scopus - 3 Citations

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-016-QYK

DOI: 10.1111/cea.14547

Abstract (EN): Objective: Digital interventions such as remote monitoring of symptoms and physiological measurements have the potential to reduce the economic burden of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but their cost-effectiveness remains unclear. This systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) aims to assess whether digital health interventions can be cost-effective in these patients. Design: Systematic review of RCTs. Study quality was assessed using RoB2 tool. Data Sources: Systematic search in three databases: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Eligibility Criteria: Studies were eligible if they were RCTs with health economic evaluations assessing participants with asthma and/or COPD and comparing a digital health intervention to standard of care. Results: We included 35 RCTs, of which 21 were related to COPD, 13 to asthma and one to both diseases. Overall, studies assessed four categories of digital health interventions: (i) Electronic patient diaries (n = 4), (ii) real-time monitoring (n = 19), (iii) teleconsultations (n = 6) and (iv) others (n = 6). Eleven studies performed a full economic evaluation analysis, while 24 studies performed a partial economic analysis. Most studies involving real-time monitoring or teleconsultations presented economic results in favour of digital health interventions (indicating them to be cost-effective or less expensive than the standard of care). Mixed results were obtained for electronic patient diaries. In the studies that conducted a full economic analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) ranged from 3530,93/QALY and 286,369,28/QALY. In the studies that conducted a partial economic analysis, the cost differences between the intervention group and the control group ranged from 0,12 and 85,217,86. Half studies with low risk of bias concluded that the intervention was economically favourable. Conclusion: Although costs varied based on intervention type, follow-up period and country, most studies report digital health interventions to be affordable or associated with decreased costs.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 18