Jeindl Reinhard, Wild Claudia
Austrian Institute for Health Technology Assessment GmbH (AIHTA), Garnisongasse 7/20, 1090, Wien, Österreich.
Wien Med Wochenschr. 2024 Mar;174(3-4):44-52. doi: 10.1007/s10354-021-00881-3. Epub 2021 Sep 16.
For most digital health applications (DiGA) only limited evidence of benefit is available. Currently available assessment frameworks do not cover all domains of a full health technology assessment (HTA). Additionally, technology-specific aspects are required for the evaluation of DiGA. This work aimed to analyze the available assessment frameworks and design an evaluation process for DiGA.
By a systematic literature search six assessment frameworks for DiGA were selected and analyzed. A hand search for strategies on DiGA of selected countries was conducted.
Of the analyzed assessment frameworks four described study designs. One assessment framework proposed a risk classification of DiGA. Aspects of artificial intelligence were assessed by one assessment framework. The analyzed countries have differing strategies for reimbursement of DiGA.
Assessment frameworks for DiGA are very heterogeneous. There are efforts to find regulations for DiGA on a national level. When evaluating DiGA, a staged approach considering risk classes with subsequent evaluation of relevant HTA aspects is recommended.
对于大多数数字健康应用程序(DiGA),仅有有限的益处证据。目前可用的评估框架并未涵盖完整的卫生技术评估(HTA)的所有领域。此外,DiGA的评估还需要特定技术方面的内容。这项工作旨在分析可用的评估框架,并设计DiGA的评估流程。
通过系统的文献检索,选择并分析了六个DiGA评估框架。对手动检索选定国家的DiGA策略进行了研究。
在分析的评估框架中,有四个描述了研究设计。一个评估框架提出了DiGA的风险分类。一个评估框架评估了人工智能方面。分析的国家对DiGA的报销有不同的策略。
DiGA的评估框架非常多样化。各国正在努力在国家层面找到DiGA的相关规定。在评估DiGA时,建议采用分阶段方法,考虑风险类别,随后对相关HTA方面进行评估。