Cost-effectiveness of noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with heart failure: health economic analysis of the TIM-HF2 trial

Background Noninvasive remote patient management (RPM) in patients with heart failure (HF) has been shown to reduce the days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions and all-cause mortality in the Telemedical Interventional Management in Heart Failure II trial (TIM-HF2). The health economic implications of these findings are the focus of the present analyses from the payer perspective. Methods and results A total of 1538 participants of the TIM-HF2 randomized controlled trial were assigned to the RPM and Usual Care group. Health claims data were available for 1450 patients (n = 715 RPM group, n= 735 Usual Care group), which represents 94.3% of the original TIM-HF2 patient population, were linked to primary data from the study documentation and evaluated in terms of the health care cost, total cost (accounting for intervention costs), costs per day alive and out of hospital (DAOH), and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The average health care costs per patient year amounted to (Sic) 14,412 (95% CI 13,284-15,539) in the RPM group and (sic) (17,537 (95% CI 16,179-18,894) in the UC group. RPM led to cost savings of (sic) 3125 per patient year (p = 0.001). After including the intervention costs, a cost saving of (Sic) 1758 per patient year remained (p = 0.048). Conclusion The additional noninvasive telemedical interventional management in patients with HF was cost-effective compared to standard care alone, since such intervention was associated with overall cost savings and superior clinical effectiveness. [GRAPHICS] .