Objectives Asthma is a prevalent chronic condition that affects approximately 300 million people worldwide, posing a significant health and economic burden. Effective management is often hindered by barriers to in-person care. Telehealth has emerged as a potential solution to enhance access to asthma care, yet its economic implications remain unclear. This review synthesizes evidence on the cost-effectiveness of synchronous telehealth compared to standard asthma care. Methods A systematic search of eight electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, NHS Economic Evaluations Database, and EconLit) was conducted from January 2000 to June 2024, with searches repeated in January 2026, for economic evaluations of telehealth interventions in asthma care. The reporting quality was assessed using the CHEERS checklist, and results were synthesized narratively. Results Four studies (published between 2005 and 2008) from high-income countries (UK and Australia) assessed telephone-based telehealth over periods ranging from 3 to 12 months compared to in-person care. Telehealth interventions resulted in higher asthma review rates, shorter visit durations, and lower costs per consultation but showed no consistent improvements in asthma control or quality of life. Conclusions Synchronous telehealth appears to be a cost-effective approach for increasing asthma review rates. However, evidence of its impact on quality of life and symptom control remains limited. Further recent studies with improved reporting are required to assess the long-term health economic value of telehealth in asthma care.
Towhari et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: