Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2001:1:5.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-1-5. Epub 2001 Nov 26.

Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review

W R Hersh  1 , M Helfand, J Wallace, D Kraemer, P Patterson, S Shapiro, M Greenlick
Affiliations
Review

Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review

W R Hersh et al. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2001.

Abstract

Background: The use of telemedicine is growing, but its efficacy for achieving comparable or improved clinical outcomes has not been established in many medical specialties. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of telemedicine interventions for health outcomes in two classes of application: home-based and office/hospital-based.

Methods: Data sources for the study included deports of studies from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and HealthSTAR databases; searching of bibliographies of review and other articles; and consultation of printed resources as well as investigators in the field. We included studies that were relevant to at least one of the two classes of telemedicine and addressed the assessment of efficacy for clinical outcomes with data of reported results. We excluded studies where the service did not historically require face-to-face encounters (e.g., radiology or pathology diagnosis). All included articles were abstracted and graded for quality and direction of the evidence.

Results: A total of 25 articles met inclusion criteria and were assessed. The strongest evidence for the efficacy of telemedicine in clinical outcomes comes from home-based telemedicine in the areas of chronic disease management, hypertension, and AIDS. The value of home glucose monitoring in diabetes mellitus is conflicting. There is also reasonable evidence that telemedicine is comparable to face-to-face care in emergency medicine and is beneficial in surgical and neonatal intensive care units as well as patient transfer in neurosurgery.

Conclusions: Despite the widespread use of telemedicine in virtually all major areas of health care, evidence concerning the benefits of its use exists in only a small number of them. Further randomized controlled trials must be done to determine where its use is most effective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Search strategies. Search strategies for MEDLINE shown; comparable strategies were used for EMBASE, CINAHL, and HealthSTAR.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hersh WR, Helfand M, Wallace JA, Kraemer DK, Patterson PK, Shapiro SE, Greenlick MR, Chan BKS, Eilers GM. Telemedicine for the Medicare Population. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 24. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E012. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2001.
    1. Grigsby J, Sanders J. Telemedicine: where it is and where it's going. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1998;129:123–127. - PubMed
    1. Strode SW, Gustke S, Allen A. Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1999;281:1066–1068. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.12.1066. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Balas EA, Jaffrey F, Kuperman GJ, Boren SA, Brown GD, Pinciroli F, Mitchell JA. Electronic communication with patients evaluation of distance medicine technology. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1997;278:152–159. doi: 10.1001/jama.278.2.152. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ohinmaa A, Hailey D, Roine D. The Assessment of Telemedicine: General Principles and a Systematic Review. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Office for Health Care Technology Assessment; 1999.