Cargando…

The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and thyroid diseases are chronic diseases that require regular monitoring through blood tests. This paper first investigates the experiences of chronic care patients with venipuncture and their expectations of an at-home...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lingervelder, Deon, Kip, Michelle M. A., Wiese, Eva D., Koffijberg, Hendrik, Ijzerman, Maarten J., Kusters, Ron
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36522664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08782-w
_version_ 1784851066489143296
author Lingervelder, Deon
Kip, Michelle M. A.
Wiese, Eva D.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Ijzerman, Maarten J.
Kusters, Ron
author_facet Lingervelder, Deon
Kip, Michelle M. A.
Wiese, Eva D.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Ijzerman, Maarten J.
Kusters, Ron
author_sort Lingervelder, Deon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and thyroid diseases are chronic diseases that require regular monitoring through blood tests. This paper first investigates the experiences of chronic care patients with venipuncture and their expectations of an at-home blood-sampling device, and then assesses the impact on societal costs of implementing such a device in current practice. METHODS: An online survey was distributed among chronic care patients to gain insight into their experience of blood sampling in current practice, and their expectations of an at-home blood-sampling device. The survey results were used as input parameters in a patient-level monte carlo analysis developed to represent a hypothetical cohort of Dutch chronically ill patients to investigate the impact on societal costs compared to usual care. RESULTS: In total, 1311 patients participated in the survey, of which 31% experience the time spent on the phlebotomy appointment as a burden. Of all respondents, 71% prefer to use an at-home blood-sampling device to monitor their chronic disease. The cost analysis indicated that implementing an at-home blood-sampling device increases the cost of phlebotomy itself by €27.25 per patient per year, but it reduces the overall societal costs by €24.86 per patient per year, mainly due to limiting productivity loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patients consider an at-home blood-sampling device to be more user-friendly than venous phlebotomy on location. Long waiting times and crowded locations can be avoided by using an at-home blood-sampling device. Implementing such a device is likely cost-saving as it is expected to reduce societal costs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08782-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9753888
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97538882022-12-15 The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact Lingervelder, Deon Kip, Michelle M. A. Wiese, Eva D. Koffijberg, Hendrik Ijzerman, Maarten J. Kusters, Ron BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and thyroid diseases are chronic diseases that require regular monitoring through blood tests. This paper first investigates the experiences of chronic care patients with venipuncture and their expectations of an at-home blood-sampling device, and then assesses the impact on societal costs of implementing such a device in current practice. METHODS: An online survey was distributed among chronic care patients to gain insight into their experience of blood sampling in current practice, and their expectations of an at-home blood-sampling device. The survey results were used as input parameters in a patient-level monte carlo analysis developed to represent a hypothetical cohort of Dutch chronically ill patients to investigate the impact on societal costs compared to usual care. RESULTS: In total, 1311 patients participated in the survey, of which 31% experience the time spent on the phlebotomy appointment as a burden. Of all respondents, 71% prefer to use an at-home blood-sampling device to monitor their chronic disease. The cost analysis indicated that implementing an at-home blood-sampling device increases the cost of phlebotomy itself by €27.25 per patient per year, but it reduces the overall societal costs by €24.86 per patient per year, mainly due to limiting productivity loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patients consider an at-home blood-sampling device to be more user-friendly than venous phlebotomy on location. Long waiting times and crowded locations can be avoided by using an at-home blood-sampling device. Implementing such a device is likely cost-saving as it is expected to reduce societal costs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08782-w. BioMed Central 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9753888/ /pubmed/36522664 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08782-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Lingervelder, Deon
Kip, Michelle M. A.
Wiese, Eva D.
Koffijberg, Hendrik
Ijzerman, Maarten J.
Kusters, Ron
The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title_full The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title_fullStr The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title_full_unstemmed The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title_short The societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
title_sort societal impact of implementing an at-home blood sampling device for chronic care patients: patient preferences and cost impact
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36522664
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08782-w
work_keys_str_mv AT lingervelderdeon thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT kipmichellema thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT wieseevad thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT koffijberghendrik thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT ijzermanmaartenj thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT kustersron thesocietalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT lingervelderdeon societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT kipmichellema societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT wieseevad societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT koffijberghendrik societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT ijzermanmaartenj societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact
AT kustersron societalimpactofimplementinganathomebloodsamplingdeviceforchroniccarepatientspatientpreferencesandcostimpact