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
. 2023 Jul 25:25:e48000.
doi: 10.2196/48000.

Mapping Factors That Affect the Uptake of Digital Therapeutics Within Health Systems: Scoping Review

Robin van Kessel #  1   2 , Andres Roman-Urrestarazu #  3   4 , Michael Anderson  1 , Ilias Kyriopoulos  1 , Samantha Field  5 , Giovanni Monti  1 , Shelby D Reed  6 , Milena Pavlova  7 , George Wharton  1 , Elias Mossialos  1   8
Affiliations

Mapping Factors That Affect the Uptake of Digital Therapeutics Within Health Systems: Scoping Review

Robin van Kessel et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Digital therapeutics are patient-facing digital health interventions that can significantly alter the health care landscape. Despite digital therapeutics being used to successfully treat a range of conditions, their uptake in health systems remains limited. Understanding the full spectrum of uptake factors is essential to identify ways in which policy makers and providers can facilitate the adoption of effective digital therapeutics within a health system, as well as the steps developers can take to assist in the deployment of products.

Objective: In this review, we aimed to map the most frequently discussed factors that determine the integration of digital therapeutics into health systems and practical use of digital therapeutics by patients and professionals.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar. Relevant data were extracted and synthesized using a thematic analysis.

Results: We identified 35,541 academic and 221 gray literature reports, with 244 (0.69%) included in the review, covering 35 countries. Overall, 85 factors that can impact the uptake of digital therapeutics were extracted and pooled into 5 categories: policy and system, patient characteristics, properties of digital therapeutics, characteristics of health professionals, and outcomes. The need for a regulatory framework for digital therapeutics was the most stated factor at the policy level. Demographic characteristics formed the most iterated patient-related factor, whereas digital literacy was considered the most important factor for health professionals. Among the properties of digital therapeutics, their interoperability across the broader health system was most emphasized. Finally, the ability to expand access to health care was the most frequently stated outcome measure.

Conclusions: The map of factors developed in this review offers a multistakeholder approach to recognizing the uptake factors of digital therapeutics in the health care pathway and provides an analytical tool for policy makers to assess their health system's readiness for digital therapeutics.

Keywords: adoption; digital health; digital medicine; digital therapeutics; framework; implementation; policy; scoping review; thematic analysis; uptake.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flowchart outlining the data collection process. HTA: health technology assessment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Map of the factors that can affect the uptake of digital therapeutics. The items in red are reported in 15% or more of the included articles. Items in yellow are reported in 5% to 15% of included articles. Items in blue are reported in less than 5% of the included articles.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Fahy N, Williams GA, Habicht T, Köhler K, Jormanainen V, Satokangas M, Tynkkynen LK, Lantzsch H, Winklemann J, Cascini F, de Belvis AG, Morsella A, Poscia A, Ricciardi W, Silenzi A, Farcasanu D, Scintee SG, Vladescu C, Delgado EB, Pueyo EA, Romero FE. Use of Digital Health Tools in Europe: Before, During and After COVID-19. Copenhagen (Denmark): European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies; 2021. [2022-11-01]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK576970/ - PubMed
    1. Patel NA, Butte AJ. Characteristics and challenges of the clinical pipeline of digital therapeutics. NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Dec 11;3(1):159. doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-00370-8. doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-00370-8.10.1038/s41746-020-00370-8 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rowland SP, Fitzgerald JE, Holme T, Powell J, McGregor A. What is the clinical value of mHealth for patients? NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Jan 13;3:4. doi: 10.1038/s41746-019-0206-x. doi: 10.1038/s41746-019-0206-x.206 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Essén A, Stern AD, Haase CB, Car J, Greaves F, Paparova D, Vandeput S, Wehrens R, Bates DW. Health app policy: international comparison of nine countries' approaches. NPJ Digit Med. 2022 Mar 18;5(1):31. doi: 10.1038/s41746-022-00573-1. doi: 10.1038/s41746-022-00573-1.10.1038/s41746-022-00573-1 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brassel S, Radu P, Bell E, Garau M. Navigating the landscape of digital health. Office of Health Economics. 2022. [2023-01-11]. https://www.ohe.org/publications/navigating-the-landscape-of-digital-hea...

Publication types