Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to compare two clinical pathways: the multiple-access outpatient pathway versus the telemedicine pathway. METHODS: The multiple-access outpatient pathway and the telemedicine pathway were both performed with WatchPAT and implemented in a real-life healthcare scenario, adopting a cost-minimization approach. A cost-minimization analysis was undertaken to assess the economic impact of the two alternatives. The cost analyses were performed in euros for the year 2021 adopting the patient, the hospital, and the societal perspectives. Given the chosen perspectives, direct medical costs, direct nonmedical costs, and indirect costs were considered. In addition, a univariate sensitivity analysis was conducted. RESULTS: From a hospital perspective, the telemedicine approach was estimated to cost €49 more than the multiple-access alternative. Considering the patient perspective, the telemedicine approach was estimated to cost €167 less than the multiple-access pathway. Considering the societal perspective, the telemedicine approach is estimated to cost €119 less than the multiple-access pathway. CONCLUSION: The adoption of telemedicine home sleep apnea testing could improve the efficiency of the healthcare processes if considering the direct and indirect costs incurred by patients and not only by healthcare providers.