Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Radiology Services For Remote Communities: Cost Minimisation Study Of Telemedicine

Peder Andreas Halvorsen and Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen
BMJ: British Medical Journal
Vol. 312, No. 7042 (May 25, 1996), pp. 1333-1336
Published by: BMJ
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29731738
Page Count: 4
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Radiology Services For Remote Communities: Cost Minimisation Study Of Telemedicine
Preview not available

Abstract

Objectives—To determine the social costs of providing a rural population with radiology services under three different systems: the existing system (a small x ray unit at the remote site and all other examinations at the nearest radiology department (the host site)); a teleradiology system (most examinations at the remote site and more advanced examinations at the host site); and all examinations at the host site. Design—Cost minimisation study. Setting—Primary health care in a remote community in Norway. Subjects—A randomly selected sample (n=597) of all patients (n=1793) having radiological examinations in 1993. Main outcome measures—Annual direct medical costs, direct non-medical (travel) costs, and indirect costs (lost production) of the three options. Results—After exclusion of costs common to the three systems the direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect costs of the three options were, respectively, £9000, £51 000, and £31 500 (total £91 500) for the existing system; £108 000, £2000, and £13 500 (total £123 500) for the teleradiology option; and £0, £75 000, and £42 000 (£117 000 in total) for the "all at host" option. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the existing system is the least costly option except when lost leisure is valued as highly as lost production. Conclusion—The teleradiology option did not seem to be cost saving in the study community. Such systems, however, may be justified on the grounds of equity of access and quality of care.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
1333
    1333
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1334
    1334
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1335
    1335
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1336
    1336