Abstract
Until around 2004, eHealth evaluations were limited in dealing with economic and financial aspects. Few included cost data, and those that did often relied on 2002, the European Commission authorised an eHealth Impact (eHI) study (www. ehealth-impact.org). Since then, almost 60 economic evaluations on both good and weak economic performance have used this eHI methodology. Aggregated data from several eHealth evaluations now show the gap between good and weak eHealth, with this difference providing meaningful data on eHealth risks that are crucial for taking realistic decisions and planning mitigation strategies. The core concept underpinning the eHI methodology is socio-economic return (SER). This information now informs decisions on eHealth investment across many countries and continents. The reality is that eHealth is not an investment to save money; it is an investment in quality, access and efficiency. Awareness of the value of the socio-economic benefits of eHealth is slowly expanding, both as information for investment decision-making and as a tool for monitoring and evaluation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Burnes, B. (2009), Managing Change, 5th edn. Harlow, UK: FT Prentice Hall.
United States Congressional Budget Office (2008), Evidence on the Costs and Benefits of Health Information Technologyhttp://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ ftpdocs/91xx/doc9168/0-20-healthit.pdf. [Accessed 26 November 2013].
Dobrev, A., Jones, T., Stroetmann, V., Stroetmann, K., Vatter, Y. and Peng, K. (2010), Interoperable eHealth Is Worth It — Securing the Benefits from Electronic Health Records and ePrescribing, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities http://www.ehr-impact.eu/downloads/documents/ehr_impact_study_final.pdf.[Accessed 26 November 2013].
FierceEMR (25 October 2012), Healthcare Execs: EHR return-on-investment measurement should start earlier, FierceEMRhttp://www.fierceemr.com/story/healthcare-execs-ehr-return-investment-measurement-should-st art-earlier/2012-10-25.
Fisher, I. (1930), The Theory of Interest, as determined by Impatience to Spend Income and Opportunity to Invest It, New York: Macmillan.
Harvard Business Press (2003), Managing Change and Transition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
HM Treasury (2011), The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. London: The Stationery Office. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.Uk/d/green_book_complete.pdf. [Accessed 26 November 2013].
Henderson, C., Knapp, M., Fernandez, J.-L., Beecham, J., Hirani, S.P., Cartwright, M., Rixon, L., Beynon, M., Rogers, A., Bower, P., Doll, H., Fitzpatrick, R., Steventon, A., Bardsley, M., Hendy, J. and Newman, S.P. (2013), “Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (Whole Systems Demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial”, British Medical Journal 346: fl035. doi: 10.1136/bmj.fl035.
Hopkin, P. (2010), Fundamentals of Risk Management: Understanding Evaluating and Implementing Effective Risk Management. London: Kogan Page.
Institute of Medicine (2001), Crossing the Quality Chasm: The IOM Health Care Quality Initiative. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2001/Crossing-the-Quality-Chasm-A-New-Health-System-for-the-21st-Centuryaspx.[Accessed 26 November 2013].
Jones, T. (2012), Costs, Benefits and Economics of eHealth, TinTree International eHealth Leadership and Development, www.tintree.org.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010), Improving Health Sector Efficiency: The Role of Information and Communication Technologies. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264084612-en.
Soumerai, S. and Koppel, R. (2012, 17 September), “A major glitch for digitized health-care records”, Wall Street Journal [online], http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443847404577627041964831020.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3D article.
Stroetmann, K.A., Jones, T., Dobrev, A. and Stroetmann, V. (2006), eHealth Is Worth It. The Economic Benefits of Implemented eHealth Solutions at Ten European Sites, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://www.ehealth-impact.org/download/documents/ehealthimpactsept2006.pdf. [Accessed 26 November 2013].
Whitten, P.S., Mair, F.S., Haycox, A., May C.R., Williams, T.L. and Hellmich, S. (2002), “Systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions”, British Medical Journal 324(1434). doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1434.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Tom Jones
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jones, T. (2014). Making the Economic Case for eHealth. In: Rosenmöller, M., Whitehouse, D., Wilson, P. (eds) Managing eHealth. The Palgrave Macmillan IESE Business Collection. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137379443_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137379443_20
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-47876-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-37944-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Business & Management CollectionBusiness and Management (R0)