[How robust are studies of currently permanently included digital health applications (DiGA)? Methodological quality of studies demonstrating positive health care effects of DiGA].

Wie belastbar sind Studien der aktuell dauerhaft aufgenommenen digitalen Gesundheitsanwendungen (DiGA)? Methodische Qualität der Studien zum Nachweis positiver Versorgungseffekte von DiGA.
DiGA Digital health applications Digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen Gesundheitstechnologie-Bewertung Health Technology Assessment Health technology assessment Methodological quality Methodologische Qualität Risk of bias Verzerrungsrisiko

Journal

Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen
ISSN: 2212-0289
Titre abrégé: Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101477604

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Historique:
received: 26 04 2022
revised: 07 09 2022
accepted: 22 09 2022
pubmed: 28 11 2022
medline: 21 12 2022
entrez: 27 11 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Since September 2020 digital health applications (DiGA) can be prescribed by physicians and psychotherapists and are reimbursed within the German Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) system for the first time worldwide. For full reimbursement, the manufacturers have to provide evidence based on scientific studies that the DiGA can provide 'positive health care effects'. This study aims to analyze and evaluate the methodological quality of efficacy studies of DiGA in the categories 'Nervensystem' and 'Psyche' of the DiGA register that are permanently accepted. The methodological quality was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). The risk of bias was assessed for the primary endpoint of each study according to an intention-to-treat analysis. Six DiGA were assessed for their methodological quality. Randomized controlled trials were conducted for all 6 DiGA that showed a high risk of bias, which was, in particular, due to a lack of blinding of the studies. In addition, drop-outs were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group in most studies. For most of the DiGA no published study protocol was available in advance so an analysis of a potential selective choice of the evaluation methodology was not possible. For reasons of transparency, verifiability, and comprehensibility of the study results, registration in a study registry and, more importantly, the publication of study protocols should be mandatory before the start of the studies. In addition, studies should be blinded by comparing the DiGA with a 'sham application' to reduce the high risk of bias. Differences in the drop-out rates of the investigated studies could indicate a lack of efficacy of the treatment in the intervention group, (technical) problems in the application of the DiGA, or a lack of motivation of the participants. The interim results 18 months after the introduction of DiGA in the German SHI system show that the studies on the evidence of the benefits of DiGA have a high potential for bias in certain areas. However, it should be positively emphasized that the manufacturers submitted randomized controlled trials to prove the medical benefit of the DiGAs investigated.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36437182
pii: S1865-9217(22)00176-3
doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.09.008
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

English Abstract Journal Article

Langues

ger

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-16

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Auteurs

Peter L Kolominsky-Rabas (PL)

Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Interdisziplinäres Zentrum für Health Technology Assessment und Public Health (IZPH), Erlangen, Deutschland. Electronic address: peter.kolominsky-rabas@fau.de.

Martin Tauscher (M)

Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Bayerns (KVB), München, Deutschland.

Roman Gerlach (R)

Kassenärztliche Vereinigung Bayerns (KVB), München, Deutschland.

Matthias Perleth (M)

Technische Universität, Berlin, Deutschland.

Nikolas Dietzel (N)

Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Interdisziplinäres Zentrum für Health Technology Assessment und Public Health (IZPH), Erlangen, Deutschland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH