Telemedicine Versus Face-to-Face Care in Ophthalmology: Costs and Utility Measures in a Real-World Setting

Abstract Objectives Advances in telemedicine offer a unique opportunity to expand access to the health system. Nevertheless, few studies have described the impact of telediagnosis implementation on health and economic outcomes. Methods An ophthalmology telediagnosis service (TeleOftalmo) was compared with traditional face-to-face care provided by the Brazilian public health system. For both groups, utility data were collected at 2 time points using the Visual Function Questionnaire–Utility Index instrument from interviews with 536 patients. The cost per patient encounter was analyzed according to the time-driven activity-based costing. Value analyses were conducted to ascertain whether and how telemedicine service has the potential to generate cost savings for the health system. Results Visual function–related quality of life did not differ significantly between TeleOftalmo and face-to-face care groups. Using the current model, the telemedicine service assisted an average of 1159 patients per month at a median cost per telediagnosis of Int$97 (interquartile range, Int$82-Int$119) versus Int$77 (interquartile range, Int$75-Int$80) for face-to-face care. If the telemedicine service was redesigned, considering the opportunities for improvement identified, it could operate at a cost of Int$53 per telediagnosis (a 31% cost savings) and could serve 3882 patients per month. Conclusions This study demonstrates the potential value of a telemedicine service. There was no difference in patient-perceived utility between a telediagnostic ophthalmology service and face-to-face care by an eye specialist. TeleOftalmo has the potential to be a cost-saving strategy for the Brazilian health system and could be a template for implementation of telediagnostic services in other regions.