This study was notable for the effort spent collecting a great amount of data. However, it must be considered as a preliminary study since it lacked a more comprehensive and detailed analysis. The clinical study design may be prone to bias, given the non-randomisation method and the poor definition of the clinical outcomes (no morbidity outcomes were assessed). Costs of the implementation of the system were partial (only costs related to the implementation system in period 2 were considered). No discounting was applied, although the cost duration was more than one year. A sensitivity analysis would have been desirable, given the local emphasis of the study cost structure.