Economic Advantages of Telehealth and Virtual Health Practitioners: Return on Investment Analysis.

Centaine L Snoswell, John B North, Liam J Caffery
{"title":"Economic Advantages of Telehealth and Virtual Health Practitioners: Return on Investment Analysis.","authors":"Centaine L Snoswell,&nbsp;John B North,&nbsp;Liam J Caffery","doi":"10.2196/15688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Telehealth is a disruptive modality that challenges the traditional model of having a clinician or patient physically present for an appointment. The benefit is that it offers the opportunity to redesign the way services are offered. For instance, a virtual health practitioner can provide videoconference consultations while being located anywhere in the world that has internet. A virtual health practitioner also obviates the issues of attracting a specialist medical workforce to rural areas, and allows the rural health service to control the specialist services that they offer.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this research was to evaluate the economic effects of 3 different models of care on rural and metropolitan hospital sites. The models of care examined were patient travel, telehealth using videoconferencing, and employment of a virtual health practitioner by a rural site.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using retrospective activity data for 3 years, a return on investment (ROI) analysis was undertaken from the perspective of a rural site and metropolitan partner site using a telehealth orthopedic fracture clinic as an example. Further analysis was conducted to calculate the number of patients that would be required to attend the clinic in each model of care for the sites to break even.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The only service model that resulted in a positive ROI for the rural site over the 3-year period was the virtual health practitioner model. The breakeven analysis demonstrated that the rural site required the lowest number of patients to recoup costs in the virtual health practitioner model of care. The rural site was unable to recoup its costs within the travel model due to the lack of opportunity for reimbursement for services and the requirement to cover the cost of travel for patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our model demonstrated that rural health care providers can increase their ROI by employing a virtual health practitioner.</p>","PeriodicalId":73557,"journal":{"name":"JMIR perioperative medicine","volume":"3 1","pages":"e15688"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709847/pdf/","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR perioperative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/15688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Background: Telehealth is a disruptive modality that challenges the traditional model of having a clinician or patient physically present for an appointment. The benefit is that it offers the opportunity to redesign the way services are offered. For instance, a virtual health practitioner can provide videoconference consultations while being located anywhere in the world that has internet. A virtual health practitioner also obviates the issues of attracting a specialist medical workforce to rural areas, and allows the rural health service to control the specialist services that they offer.

Objective: The aim of this research was to evaluate the economic effects of 3 different models of care on rural and metropolitan hospital sites. The models of care examined were patient travel, telehealth using videoconferencing, and employment of a virtual health practitioner by a rural site.

Methods: Using retrospective activity data for 3 years, a return on investment (ROI) analysis was undertaken from the perspective of a rural site and metropolitan partner site using a telehealth orthopedic fracture clinic as an example. Further analysis was conducted to calculate the number of patients that would be required to attend the clinic in each model of care for the sites to break even.

Results: The only service model that resulted in a positive ROI for the rural site over the 3-year period was the virtual health practitioner model. The breakeven analysis demonstrated that the rural site required the lowest number of patients to recoup costs in the virtual health practitioner model of care. The rural site was unable to recoup its costs within the travel model due to the lack of opportunity for reimbursement for services and the requirement to cover the cost of travel for patients.

Conclusions: Our model demonstrated that rural health care providers can increase their ROI by employing a virtual health practitioner.

Abstract Image

远程医疗和虚拟医疗从业者的经济优势:投资回报分析。
背景:远程医疗是一种颠覆性的模式,挑战了有临床医生或患者亲自出席预约的传统模式。好处是它提供了重新设计提供服务的方式的机会。例如,虚拟医疗从业者可以在世界上任何有互联网的地方提供视频会议咨询。虚拟保健医生还避免了吸引专业医疗人员到农村地区工作的问题,并使农村保健服务机构能够控制它们提供的专业服务。目的:本研究的目的是评价3种不同的护理模式在农村和城市医院的经济效果。研究的护理模式包括患者旅行、使用视频会议的远程保健以及农村站点雇用虚拟保健从业人员。方法:利用3年的回顾性活动数据,以远程医疗骨科骨折诊所为例,从农村站点和城市伙伴站点的角度进行投资回报率(ROI)分析。我们进行了进一步的分析,以计算在每一种护理模式下需要到诊所就诊的患者数量,以使诊所达到收支平衡。结果:唯一的服务模式,导致一个积极的投资回报率为农村站点在3年期间是虚拟卫生从业者模式。盈亏平衡分析表明,在虚拟保健医生模式下,农村地区需要最低数量的患者来收回成本。由于没有机会报销服务费用和需要支付病人的旅费,农村医疗点无法在旅费模式内收回其费用。结论:我们的模型表明,农村卫生保健提供者可以通过雇用虚拟卫生从业者提高他们的投资回报率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信