ISBN: Outcomes No of Participants (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with Usual care Risk difference with structured telephone support and telemonitoring (95% CI) 2 Downgraded by 1 increment if the confidence interval crossed one MID or by 2 increments if the confidence interval crossed both MIDs 3 Unable to calculate as studies reported MD and were analysed using the generic inverse variance method Chronic Heart Failure Monitoring NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. ISBN: 978-1-4731-3093-7 8.4.4 Economic evidence No relevant economic evidence was identified in the 2003 guideline (CG5). Two studies were included in the 2010 guideline update (CG108): one UK cost-consequence analysis comparing remote monitoring to usual care using data collected during the Home-HF study,83 and one Italian cost- consequence analysis comparing home-based telecardiology and usual care based on a prospective . However, these studies were excluded from this review. The UK study was excluded from this review as the intervention was not considered to be applicable, whereas the Italian study was excluded due to methodological limitations. This is listed in appendix I, with reasons for exclusion given. Four additional health economic studies were identified in this update. One additional health economic study was identified with the relevant comparison and has been included in this review.252, This is summarised in the health economic evidence profile below (Table 96) and the health economic evidence table in appendix G. Two economic studies relating to this review question were identified but were excluded due to methodological limitations.92, 315 One study was identified but selectively excluded as, the committee judged that other available evidence was of greater applicability and methodological quality, and therefore this study was selectively excluded. 360 These are listed in appendix I, with reasons for exclusion given. 