Outcome domains and measurement instruments of patient-relevant improvement of structure and processes as a new set of outcomes for evaluating and approving digital health applications: systematic review

Author:

Scheibe Madlen,Knapp Andreas,Harst Lorenz,Schmitt Jochen

Abstract

Abstract Background In October 2020, digital health applications (DiGAs) became part of standard care in Germany. For approval, DiGA manufacturers must demonstrate medical benefit or patient-relevant improvement of structure and processes (PISP). PISP refers to an innovative outcome core area in terms of proof of benefits and reimbursement decisions. These are subdivided into 9 outcome domains, including for example health literacy, facilitating access to care, and coping with illness-related difficulties in everyday life. Their implementation aims at empowering patients, encouraging shared decision-making, and increasing patient-centeredness in healthcare delivery. Given the novelty of PISP, no standardized set of outcomes and outcome measurement instruments currently exists to operationalize the domains. Learning from previous evaluation studies can help operationalize and standardize PISPs for evaluation studies of digital health applications. Therefore, we investigated the outcomes and outcome measurement instruments, used in controlled trials to assess DiGA-compliant applications, published before the Digital Health Applications Ordinance of April 2020. Methods We conducted a systematic review of studies published between 01/2015 and 04/2020, via MEDLINE and Embase, complemented by forward/backward searches. Controlled trials assessing interventions adhering to the definition of DiGA were eligible, if they applied a validated outcome measurement instrument, and if results were presented in German or English. Title-abstract screening, full-text screening, data extraction and narrative synthesis were conducted independently by two researchers. Results Out of 2,671 references identified, 6 studies collecting a total of 48 outcomes were included. 14 outcomes (29.2%) addressed PISP by using 13 different measurement instruments. The outcomes corresponded to 5 of 9 PISP outcome domains with health literacy being the most common (7/14, 50.0%). Conclusions This review provides an overview of the characteristics of PISPs used in previous evaluation studies of DiGA-compliant applications. It shows which outcomes and validated outcome measurement instruments can be used to measure PISP and where knowledge is still lacking. These results serve as a starting point for operationalizing and standardizing PISPs and help to increase the outcome measurement quality of PISPs.

Funder

European Regional Development Fund and the Free State of Saxony

Technische Universität Dresden

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference67 articles.

1. Lauer W, Löbker W, Höfgen B. Digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen (DiGA): Bewertung der Erstattungsfähigkeit mittels DiGA-Fast-Track-Verfahrens im Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte (BfArM). Bundesgesundheitsbl. 2021;64(10):1232–40.

2. Gerke S, Stern AD, Minssen T. Germany’s digital health reforms in the COVID-19 era: lessons and opportunities for other countries. Npj Digit Med. 2020;3:94.

3. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC. 2017. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/oj. Accessed 28 Apr 2023.

4. World Health Organization. ICD-10: International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems: 10th revision. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.

5. Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM). The fast-track process for digital health applications (DiGA) according to section 139e SGBV. A guide for manufacturers, service providers and users. Bonn: Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM). 2020. https://www.bfarm.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/MedicalDevices/DiGA_Guide.pdf. Accessed 28 Apr 2023.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Digital health applications and health literacy: an explorative analysis;Information Research an international electronic journal;2024-06-18

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3