Evidence requirements of permanently listed digital health applications (DiGA) and their implementation in the German DiGA directory: an analysis

Author:

Mäder Melanie,Timpel Patrick,Schönfelder Tonio,Militzer-Horstmann Carsta,Scheibe Sandy,Heinrich Ria,Häckl Dennis

Abstract

Abstract Background With its digital health application (DiGA)-system, Germany is considered one of Europe's pioneers in the field of evidence-based digital health. Incorporating DiGA into standard medical care must be based on evidence-based success factors; however, a comprehensive overview of the evidence required of scientific studies for their approval is lacking. Objective The study aims to, (1) identify specific requirements defined by the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (German: Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel- und Medizinprodukte; BfArM) to design adequate studies, proving a positive healthcare effect, and (2) to assess the evidence given for applications permanently listed in the DiGA directory. Methods A multi-step approach was used: (1) identification of the evidence requirements for applications permanently listed in the DiGA directory, (2) identification of the evidence available supporting them. Results All DiGA permanently listed in the DiGA directory (13 applications) are included in the formal analysis. Most DiGA addressed mental health (n = 7), and can be prescribed for one or two indications (n = 10). All permanently listed DiGA have demonstrated their positive healthcare effect through a medical benefit, and most of them provide evidence for one defined primary endpoint. All DiGA manufacturers conducted a randomized controlled trial. Discussion It is striking that— although patient-relevant structural and procedural improvements show high potential for improving care, especially in terms of processes — all DiGA have provided a positive care effect via a medical benefit. Although BfArM accepts study designs with a lower level of evidence for the proof of a positive healthcare effect, all manufacturers conducted a study with a high level of evidence. Conclusion The results of this analysis indicate that permanently listed DiGA meet higher standards than required by the guideline.

Funder

Universität Leipzig

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Health Policy

Reference65 articles.

1. Essén A, Stern AD, Haase CB, et al. Health app policy: international comparison of nine countries’ approaches. NPJ Digit Med. 2022;5(1):31. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00573-1.

2. Giebel GD, Speckemeier C, Abels C, et al. Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Protocol for a Scoping Review. JMIR Res Protoc. 2022;11(4):e32702. https://doi.org/10.2196/32702.

3. BfArM. Das Fast-Track-Verfahren für digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen (DiGA) nach § 139e SGB V: Ein Leitfaden für Hersteller, Leistungserbringer und Anwender. 2022. Available at https://www.bfarm.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Medizinprodukte/diga_leitfaden.html.

4. Gordon WJ, Landman A, Zhang H, et al. Beyond validation: getting health apps into clinical practice. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-019-0212-z.

5. WHO. Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025 2021. Available at https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/344249/9789240020924-eng.pdf. Accessed 11 July, 2022.

Cited by 13 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

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