Head Neck. 2017 Dec;39(12):2470-2480
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to report the economic outcomes of a new synchronous telepractice service providing speech pathology intervention to patients with head and neck cancer at nonmetropolitan facilities.
METHODS: A multisite randomized controlled trial comparing standard care versus a new synchronous telepractice model was conducted within a large Australian public cancer service. Data pertaining to health service costs (staff wages, equipment, and patient travel reimbursement), patient +/- carer costs (travel and wages), and patient-reported quality of life (Assessment of Quality of Life questionnaire 4D) were collected.
RESULTS: Eighty-two referrals (39 standard care and 43 synchronous telepractice care) were managed. The new telepractice service reported average cost savings of 12% (P < .0058) for the health service and $40.05 saving per patient per referral. An equivalent positive increase in quality of life (0.04) was reported for both groups.
CONCLUSION: The synchronous telepractice service provides cost efficiencies over standard care for providing remote specialist speech pathology head and neck cancer intervention.
- An Australian study of eighty-two referrals concludes that a synchronous telepractice service provides cost efficiencies over standard care for providing remote specialist speech pathology head and neck cancer intervention.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to report the economic outcomes of a new synchronous telepractice service providing speech pathology intervention to patients with head and neck cancer at nonmetropolitan facilities.
METHODS: A multisite randomized controlled trial comparing standard care versus a new synchronous telepractice model was conducted within a large Australian public cancer service. Data pertaining to health service costs (staff wages, equipment, and patient travel reimbursement), patient +/- carer costs (travel and wages), and patient-reported quality of life (Assessment of Quality of Life questionnaire 4D) were collected.
RESULTS: Eighty-two referrals (39 standard care and 43 synchronous telepractice care) were managed. The new telepractice service reported average cost savings of 12% (P < .0058) for the health service and $40.05 saving per patient per referral. An equivalent positive increase in quality of life (0.04) was reported for both groups.
CONCLUSION: The synchronous telepractice service provides cost efficiencies over standard care for providing remote specialist speech pathology head and neck cancer intervention.
