Professor Jürgen Wasem, policy advisor and researcher in the field of medical management at the University of Duisburg-Essen, criticizes the framework agreement on remuneration amounts reached in mid-April by the responsible arbitration board for so-called digital health applications (DiGA). The economist doubts the value-based pricing, i.e. the cost-outcome ratio, because it is difficult to assess the benefit measurement for the newly introduced DiGA.
The Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, or BfArM for short, has so far only examined the positive supply effects of these „apps on prescription“ in evaluation procedures. According to Wasem, however, the GKV-Spitzenverband would have to introduce a benefit assessment as it does for drugs that are also based on additional benefits of a comparative therapy, so that the right result comes out at a reasonable price. Wasem goes on to explain that the data base is too thin and inconsistent at the present time.
Other experts agree, such as Ada Health’s Anisa Idris. Ada Health is a well-known DiGA manufacturer. Current reimbursement models are not innovative enough, Idris says, because data collection and quality are still challenging.
The head of Barmer’s digital department, Regina Vetters, proposes a usage-based reimbursement concept because usage and patient engagement are two important criteria for the resounding success of the introduced DiGA. Digital health apps that do not meet the digitalization requirements should therefore not be included in the list of „apps on prescription“ either.
Source: www.aerzteblatt.de