Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T08:12:05.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cost issues with telepsychiatry in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Donald M. Hilty ,
James A. Bourgeois ,
Thomas S. Nesbitt  and
Robert E. Hales
Donald M. Hilty
Affiliation:
University of California Davis Medical Center, 2230 Stockton Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA, email [email protected]
James A. Bourgeois
Affiliation:
University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA
Thomas S. Nesbitt
Affiliation:
Regional Outreach and Telehealth, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA
Robert E. Hales
Affiliation:
University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, California, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Videoconferencing has increased patient access to psychiatric care by linking specialists at academic or regional health centres with primary health care professionals in shortage areas (Hilty et al, 1999, 2002). Preliminary studies have demonstrated positive outcomes and user satisfaction (Hilty et al, 2002). Information is still being sought regarding costs because of a paucity of clinical outcome studies, cost data and randomised trials.

Type
Thematic Paper – Telepsychiatry
Information
International Psychiatry , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , January 2004 , pp. 6 - 8
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits noncommercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2004

References

Alessi, N. (1999) Cost-effectiveness analysis in forensic telepsychiatry: prisoner involuntary treatment evaluations. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health, 5, 17.Google Scholar
Bourgeois, J. A., Hilty, D. M., Klein, S. C., et al (2003) Expansion of the consultation–liaison psychiatry paradigm at a university medical center: integration of diversified clinical and funding models. General Hospital Psychiatry, 25, 262–268.Google Scholar
Dimand, R. J., Marcin, J. P., Struve, S., et al (2004) Financial benefits of a pediatric care unit based telemedicine program to a rural adult intensive care unit: impact of keeping acutely ill and injured children in their local community. Telemedicine Journal and E-Health (in press).Google Scholar
Hailey, D. M. & Crowe, B. L. (2000) Assessing the economic impact of telemedicine. Disease Management and Health Outcomes, 7, 187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilty, D. M., Servis, M. E., Nesbitt, T. S., et al (1999) The use of telemedicine to provide consultation–liaison service to the primary care setting. Psychiatric Annals, 29, 421–427.Google Scholar
Hilty, D., Luo, J. S., Morache, C., et al (2002) Telepsychiatry: what is it and what are its advantages and disadvantages? CNS Drugs, 16, 527–548.Google Scholar
Hilty, D. M., Liu, W., Marks, S., et al (2004a) The effectiveness of telepsychiatry: a brief review. Canadian Psychiatric Association Bulletin (in press).Google Scholar
Hilty, D. M., Marks, S., Urness, D., et al (2004b) Clinical and educational applications of telepsychiatry: a review. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (in press).Google Scholar
Lyketsos, C., Roques, C., Hovanec, L., et al (2001) Telemedicine use and reduction of psychiatric admissions from a long-term care facility. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 14, 76–79.Google Scholar
Weinstein, M. C., Siegel, J. E., Gold, M. R., et al (1996) Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 276, 1253–1258.Google Scholar
Whitten, P., Kingsley, C. & Grigsby, J. (2000) Results of a meta-analysis of cost–benefit research: is this a question worth asking? Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 6 (suppl. 1), 4–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.