Cost-effectiveness of a telehealth intervention for in-home dementia care support: Findings from the FamTechCare clinical trial.

The cost analysis included 68 of the 84 dyads from the trial, and 16 dyads were excluded because time records were incomplete. The analysis did not include internet costs needed for video transmission; if a hotspot was needed, the paper estimated an additional $40 per month, which would make the intervention less cost-effective. It did not include societal costs such as informal caregiving hours or emergency room visits, and it did not calculate quality-adjusted life years, so it cannot be directly compared with many other interventions. The willingness-to-pay threshold used to call the intervention cost-effective came from a different trial with a different intervention and 8 sessions over 3 months, not from caregivers in this trial. The sample was mostly older non-Hispanic white participants, limiting generalisability. The control group also received tailored weekly phone support, so the comparison is with active telephone support, not with usual care or no support. This paper is a secondary cost-effectiveness analysis; the main outcome analysis is reported elsewhere.

The paper is listed as supported by extramural NIH research funding. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Do not read this as evidence that FamTechCare saves money. It cost $48.43 per dyad per week compared with $6.96 per dyad per week for telephone support, and the cost-effectiveness conclusion relied on a willingness-to-pay amount from another trial rather than a measured threshold for this intervention.