New developments in information and communications technologies are increasingly being proposed as technological enhancements to healthcare delivery. However, if the full potential of such technological advances is to be realized from a clinical perspective, it is vital that proper methodology is in place to facilitate the assessment and evaluation of such proposed solutions in order to maximize the benefit which technology can offer. In this paper it is proposed that a model-based framework should provide the underpinning evaluative methodology. Candidate models are proposed. The applicability of this modelling approach is considered in the context of a recently developed prototype service for the telematic delivery of home and satellite haemodialyis in the management of end-stage renal disease.
Carson E R, Cramp D G, Hicks R W (eds.). Hospital without walls. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine2001; 64: 153-242.
2.
Department of Health. Information for Health. London: HMSO, 1998.
3.
Tohme W G, Hayes W S, Winchester J Fet al. Requirements for urology and renal dialysis PC-based telemedicine applications: a comparative analysis. Telemedicine Journal1997; 3(1).
4.
Mitchell J, Disney A.Clinical applications of renal telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare1997; 3: 158-162.
5.
Mitchell B R, Mitchell J G, Disney A P S.User adoption issues in renal telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare1996; 2(2): 81-86.
6.
Allen A, Hayes J, Sadisvan R, Williamson S K, Wittman C.A pilot study of the physician acceptance of tele-oncology. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare1995; 1: 34-37.
7.
Bashshur R L.Base evaluation on access and quality as well as cost. Telemedicine Monthly Newsletter of Telecommunications in Healthcare1994; 2: 8.
8.
Bashshur R L.On the definition and evaluation of telemedicine. Telemedicine Journal1995; 1: 19-30.
9.
Tohme W G, Hayes W S, Mun S Ket al. Technology assessment for an integrated PC-based platform for three medical applications. Proceedings of the Society of Photo-Optic Instrument Engineers, PACS Design and Evaluation: Medical Imaging1996; 2711: 335-344.
10.
Lobley D.The economics of telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare1997; 3: 117-125.
11.
McIntosh E, Cairns J.A framework for the economic evaluation of telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare1997; 3: 132-139.
Cramp D G, Carson E R.A model-based framework for public health: a vehicle for maximising the value of telecare. In: Laxminarayan S (ed.). Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE EMBS International Conference on IT Applications in Biomedicine, November 2000, Washington DC. Piscataway NJ: IEEE, 2000, pp. 272-277.
14.
Cramp D G, Carson E R.Health care planning and priority setting - a modelling approach. In: Malek M (ed.). Setting priorities in health care. Chichester: Wiley, 1994, pp. 95-102.
15.
Albisser A M.The disease management equation. In: Carson E, Salzsieder E (eds.). Proceedings of the 4th iFAC Symposium on Modelling and Control in Biomedical Systems, March 2000, Greifswald, Germany. Oxford: Elsevier Science, 2000, pp. 47-52.
16.
Albisser A M, Hodel A S, Albisser J B, Wanner A.Chronic disease management: a systems model relating outcomes, reporting, monitoring, interventions and satisfaction. Control Engineering Practice2001; 9 [in press].
17.
Geisler E.Mapping the knowledge-base of management of medical technology. International Journal of Healthcare Technology Management (Special issue on Advances in the Management of Technology in Healthcare) 1999; 1 (1/2): 2-12.
18.
Carson E R, Cramp D G, Darnige A, Morgan A, Murley D.A systems approach to the development and evaluation of a telematic home haemodialysis service. Hellenic Nephrology; 1999: 11(supplement): 137-146.
19.
Carson E R, Cramp D G, Morgan A, Roudsari A V.Clinical decision support, systems methodology and telemedicine: their role in the management of chronic disease. IEEE Transactions on IT in Biomedicine1998; 2: 80-88.
