Limits...
Measuring Costs and Outcomes of Tele-Intervention When Serving Families of Children who are Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing.

Blaiser KM, Behl D, Callow-Heusser C, White KR - Int J Telerehabil (2013)

Bottom Line: The TI group scored statistically significantly higher on the expressive language measure than the in-person group (p =.03).A measure of home visit quality revealed that the TI group scored statistically significantly better on the Parent Engagement subscale of the Home Visit Rating Scales-Adapted & Extended (HOVRS-A+; Roggman et al., 2012).Cost savings associated with providing services via TI increased as the intensity of service delivery increased.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education, College of Education and Human Services, Utah State University, Logan, UT.

ABSTRACT

Background: Optimal outcomes for children who are deaf/hard-of-hearing (DHH) depend on access to high quality, specialized early intervention services. Tele-intervention (TI), the delivery of early intervention services via telehealth technology, has the potential to meet this need in a cost-effective manner.

Method: Twenty-seven families of infants and toddlers with varying degrees of hearing loss participated in a randomized study, receiving their services primarily through TI or via traditional in-person home visits. Pre- and post-test measures of child outcomes, family and provider satisfaction, and costs were collected.

Results: The TI group scored statistically significantly higher on the expressive language measure than the in-person group (p =.03). A measure of home visit quality revealed that the TI group scored statistically significantly better on the Parent Engagement subscale of the Home Visit Rating Scales-Adapted & Extended (HOVRS-A+; Roggman et al., 2012). Cost savings associated with providing services via TI increased as the intensity of service delivery increased. Although most providers and families were positive about TI, there was great variability in their perceptions.

Conclusions: Tele-intervention is a promising cost-effective method for delivering high quality early intervention services to families of children who are DHH.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Cost savings for TI when compared to In-person home visit.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4352990&req=5

f3-6129-24251-1-pb: Cost savings for TI when compared to In-person home visit.

Mentions: Using these figures, the estimated cost of providing services for a two-year period to 15 families (assumed to be the average “caseload” for a single provider) is shown in Figure 3. As seen in this figure, if every child received an average of only one visit per month, in-person services are less expensive than TI services. However, if more frequent services were provided, TI services have a growing financial advantage. If 3–4 visits were provided to each child each month (similar to what is reported in an ongoing study being conducted by the National Institutes of Health (Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss, 2013), the cost savings for providing services to 15 families using TI instead of in-person services would be $56,280 to $86,970 over a 24 month period. Such cost savings, taken together with the evidence that children in the TI group (as described herein) make as good or better progress in receptive and expressive language, suggests that TI should be seriously considered as a way of delivering services to all 0–3 year old children who are DHH.


Measuring Costs and Outcomes of Tele-Intervention When Serving Families of Children who are Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing.

Blaiser KM, Behl D, Callow-Heusser C, White KR - Int J Telerehabil (2013)

Cost savings for TI when compared to In-person home visit.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4352990&req=5

f3-6129-24251-1-pb: Cost savings for TI when compared to In-person home visit.
Mentions: Using these figures, the estimated cost of providing services for a two-year period to 15 families (assumed to be the average “caseload” for a single provider) is shown in Figure 3. As seen in this figure, if every child received an average of only one visit per month, in-person services are less expensive than TI services. However, if more frequent services were provided, TI services have a growing financial advantage. If 3–4 visits were provided to each child each month (similar to what is reported in an ongoing study being conducted by the National Institutes of Health (Outcomes of Children with Hearing Loss, 2013), the cost savings for providing services to 15 families using TI instead of in-person services would be $56,280 to $86,970 over a 24 month period. Such cost savings, taken together with the evidence that children in the TI group (as described herein) make as good or better progress in receptive and expressive language, suggests that TI should be seriously considered as a way of delivering services to all 0–3 year old children who are DHH.

Bottom Line: The TI group scored statistically significantly higher on the expressive language measure than the in-person group (p =.03).A measure of home visit quality revealed that the TI group scored statistically significantly better on the Parent Engagement subscale of the Home Visit Rating Scales-Adapted & Extended (HOVRS-A+; Roggman et al., 2012).Cost savings associated with providing services via TI increased as the intensity of service delivery increased.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education, College of Education and Human Services, Utah State University, Logan, UT.

ABSTRACT

Background: Optimal outcomes for children who are deaf/hard-of-hearing (DHH) depend on access to high quality, specialized early intervention services. Tele-intervention (TI), the delivery of early intervention services via telehealth technology, has the potential to meet this need in a cost-effective manner.

Method: Twenty-seven families of infants and toddlers with varying degrees of hearing loss participated in a randomized study, receiving their services primarily through TI or via traditional in-person home visits. Pre- and post-test measures of child outcomes, family and provider satisfaction, and costs were collected.

Results: The TI group scored statistically significantly higher on the expressive language measure than the in-person group (p =.03). A measure of home visit quality revealed that the TI group scored statistically significantly better on the Parent Engagement subscale of the Home Visit Rating Scales-Adapted & Extended (HOVRS-A+; Roggman et al., 2012). Cost savings associated with providing services via TI increased as the intensity of service delivery increased. Although most providers and families were positive about TI, there was great variability in their perceptions.

Conclusions: Tele-intervention is a promising cost-effective method for delivering high quality early intervention services to families of children who are DHH.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus