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

5Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mäder, M., Timpel, P., Schönfelder, T., Militzer-Horstmann, C., Scheibe, S., Heinrich, R., & Häckl, D. (2023). Evidence requirements of permanently listed digital health applications (DiGA) and their implementation in the German DiGA directory: an analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09287-w

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free