Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar 23;17(6):2119.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph17062119.

How to Value Digital Health Interventions? A Systematic Literature Review

Affiliations

How to Value Digital Health Interventions? A Systematic Literature Review

Katarzyna Kolasa et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

In Europe, there were almost twice as many patents granted for medical technology (13,795) compared to pharmaceuticals (7441) in 2018. It is important to ask how to integrate such an amount of innovations into routine clinical practice and how to measure the value it brings to the healthcare system. Given the novelty of digital health interventions (DHI), one can even question whether the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) approach developed for pharmaceuticals can be used or whether we need to develop a new DHI's value assessment framework. We conducted a systematic literature review of published DHIs' assessment guidelines. Each publication was analyzed with a 12-items checklist based on a EUnetHTA core model enriched with additional criteria such as usability, interoperability, and data security. In total, 11 value assessment guidelines were identified. The review revealed that safety, clinical effectiveness, usability, economic aspects, and interoperability were most often discussed (seven out of 11). More than half of the guidelines addressed organizational impact, data security, choice of comparator, and technical considerations (six out of 11). The unmet medical needs (three out of 11), along with the ethical (two out of 11) and legal aspects (one out of 11), were given the least attention. No author provided an analytical framework for the calculation of clinical and economic outcomes. We elicited five recommendations for the choice of DHI's value criteria and a methodological suggestion for the pricing and reimbursement framework. Our conclusions lead to the need for a new DHI's value assessment framework instead of a QALY approach.

Keywords: digital health; mobile heath; pricing and reimbursement; telemedicine; value assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of literature search.

References

    1. Communication on Enabling the Digital Transformation of Health and Care in the Digital Single Market; Empowering Citizens and Building a Healthier Society. [(accessed on 18 January 2020)]; Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-enablin....
    1. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions—An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union. [(accessed on 20 November 2018)]; Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52007DC0575.
    1. Gartner Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2020. [(accessed on 3 January 2020)]; Available online: https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/gartner-top-10-strategic-tech...
    1. Third Global Survey on eHealth—2015. [(accessed on 3 January 2020)]; Available online: https://www.who.int/goe/survey/2015survey/en/
    1. Guidances with Digital Health Content. [(accessed on 18 January 2020)]; Available online: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/digital-health/guidances-digital-hea....

Publication types