Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

A MODEL FOR ASSESSMENT OF TELEMEDICINE APPLICATIONS: MAST

  • Kristian Kidholm (a1), Anne Granstrøm Ekeland (a2), Lise Kvistgaard Jensen (a3), Janne Rasmussen (a3), Claus Duedal Pedersen (a3), Alison Bowes (a4), Signe Agnes Flottorp (a5) and Mickael Bech (a6)...
Abstract

Objectives: Telemedicine applications could potentially solve many of the challenges faced by the healthcare sectors in Europe. However, a framework for assessment of these technologies is need by decision makers to assist them in choosing the most efficient and cost-effective technologies. Therefore in 2009 the European Commission initiated the development of a framework for assessing telemedicine applications, based on the users’ need for information for decision making. This article presents the Model for ASsessment of Telemedicine applications (MAST) developed in this study.

Methods: MAST was developed through workshops with users and stakeholders of telemedicine.

Results: Based on the workshops and using the EUnetHTA Core HTA Model as a starting point a three-element model was developed, including: (i) preceding considerations, (ii) multidisciplinary assessment, and (iii) transferability assessment. In the multidisciplinary assessment, the outcomes of telemedicine applications comprise seven domains, based on the domains in the EUnetHTA model.

Conclusions: MAST provides a structure for future assessment of telemedicine applications. MAST will be tested during 2010–13 in twenty studies of telemedicine applications in nine European countries in the EC project Renewing Health.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

1.JS Arlbjørn . Process optimization with simple means: The power of visualization. Ind Commer Train. 2011;43:151159.

7.M Drummond , A Griffin , R Tarricone . Economic evaluation for devices and drugs – same or different? Value Health. 2009;12:402404.

9.M Egger , GD Smith , D Altman , eds. Systematic reviews in health care. Meta-analysis in context. London: BMJ Books; 2001.

10.AG Ekeland , A Bowes , S Flottorp . Effectiveness of telemedicine: A systematic review of reviews. Int J Med Inform 2010;79:736771.

12.D Hailey , R Roine , A Ohinmaa . Systematic review of evidence for the benefits of telemedicine. J Telemed Telecare. 2002;8 (Suppl 1):17.

13.WR Hersh , M Helfand , J Wallace , Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine intervention: A systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2001;1:5.

18.A Ohinmaa , D Hailey , R Roine . Elements for assessment of telemedicine applications. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:190202.

19.RE Scott , FG McCarthy , PA Jennett , Telehealth outcomes: A synthesis of the literature and recommendations for outcome indicators. J Telemed Telecare. 2007;13 (Suppl 2):138.

20.M. Scriven Evaluation thesaurus. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1991.

21.I Simera , D Moher , A Hirst , Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and impact of your research: Reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med. 2010;8:24.

22.P Taylor . Evaluating telemedicine systems and services. J Telemed Telecare. 2005;11:167177.

24.PS Whitten , FS Mair , A Haycox , CR May , TL Williams , S Hellmich . Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions. Br Med J. 2002;324:14341437.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Kidholm et al. supplementary material
Supplementary data 1

 Word (84 KB)
84 KB
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Kidholm et al. supplementary material
Supplementary data 2

 Word (1.5 MB)
1.5 MB