This information is for reference purposes only. It was current when produced and may now be outdated. Archive material is no longer maintained, and some links may not work. Persons with disabilities having difficulty accessing this information should contact us at: https://digital.ahrq.gov/contact-us. Let us know the nature of the problem, the Web address of what you want, and your contact information.
Please go to digital.ahrq.gov for current information.

Outcomes of the Kaiser Permanente Tele-Home Health Research Project

Authors
Johnston B, Wheeler L, Deuser J, Sousa KH
Journal
Arch Fam Med
Publication Date
2000 Jan
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
40-5
  • HIT Description: Remote video technology More info...
  • Purpose of Study: Evaluate the use of remote video technology in the home health setting
  • Years of study: 1996-1997
  • Study Design: Quasi-experimental
  • Outcomes: Quality of care, access to care, patient satisfaction, costs
Summary:
  • Settings: Home health department located in Sacramento, California as part of a large health maintenance organization
  • Intervention: Video visits in addition to the regular home-health visits for the intervention group
  • Evaluation Method: collection of patient survey and interview data for both control and intervention populations
  • HIT System: Home video system allowed the patient and the nurse to see and communicate in real-time, as well as an analog stethoscope, digital blood pressure machine and magnifying lens.
  • Costs: $1,830 per patient in the intervention group (vs. $1,167 for control group members on average)
  • Quality of Care and Patient Safety Outcome: no differences in the quality indicators (medication compliance, knowledge of disease, and ability of self-care) were observed.
  • Changes in healthcare costs: Increased cost of home health services in intervention group ($1,830 vs. $1,167) but decreased average total cost of care ($1,948 vs. $2,674).
  • Changes in efficiency and productivity: Allowed one nurse to visit 15-20 patients virtually per day (vs. 5-6 patients with control intervention)�
The information on this page is archived and provided for reference purposes only.