Background: In October 2020, Germany became the first country, worldwide, to approve certain mobile health (mHealth) apps, referred to as DiGA (Digitale Gesundheitsanwendungen, in German, meaning digital health applications), for prescription with costs covered by standard statutory health insurance. Yet, this option has only been used to a limited extent so far. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate physicians’ and psychotherapists’ current attitudes toward mHealth apps, barriers to adoption, and potential remedies. Methods: We conducted a two-stage sequential mixed methods study. In phase one, semistructured interviews were conducted with physicians and psychotherapists for questionnaire design. In phase two, an online survey was conducted among general practitioners, physicians, and psychotherapists. Results: A total of 1308 survey responses by mostly outpatient-care general practitioners, physicians, and psychotherapists from across Germany who could prescribe DiGA were recorded, making this the largest study on mHealth prescriptions to date. A total of 62.1% (807/1299) of respondents supported the opportunity to prescribe DiGA. Improved adherence (997/1294, 77.0%), health literacy (842/1294, 65.1%), and disease management (783/1294, 60.5%) were most frequently seen as benefits of DiGA. However, only 30.3% (393/1299) of respondents planned to prescribe DiGA, varying greatly by medical specialty. Professionals are still facing substantial barriers, such as insufficient information (1135/1295, 87.6%), reimbursement for DiGA-related medical services (716/1299, 55.1%), medical evidence (712/1298, 54.9%), legal uncertainties (680/1299, 52.3%), and technological uncertainties (658/1299, 50.7%). To support professionals who are unsure of prescribing DiGA, extended information campaigns (1104/1297, 85.1%) as well as recommendations from medical associations (1041/1297, 80.3%) and medical colleagues (1024/1297, 79.0%) were seen as the most impactful remedies. Conclusions: To realize the benefits from DiGA through increased adoption, additional information sharing about DiGA from trusted bodies, reimbursement for DiGA-related medical services, and further medical evidence are recommended.

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

Background: Health care systems worldwide are struggling to keep rising costs at bay with only modest outcome improvement among many diseases. Digitization with technologies like Artificial Intelligence or Machine Learning algorithms might address this. Although digital technologies have been successfully applied in clinical studies the effect on the overall health care system so far was limited. The regulatory ecosystem or data privacy might be responsible, but other reasons may also predominate. Objective: We analyzed how the digitization of the German health care market is currently perceived among different stakeholders and investigated reasons for its slow adaption. Methods: This was a mixed methods study split into a qualitative Part A using the conceptual approach of the Grounded Theory and a quantitative Part B using the Delphi method. For Part A we interviewed experts in the health care system and converted the results into 17 hypotheses. The Delphi method consisted of an online survey which was sent to the participants via email and was available for three months. For the assessment of the 17 hypotheses, the participants were given a six-point Likert scale. The participants were grouped into patients, physicians, and providers of services within the German health care market. Results: There was a strong alignment of opinions on the hypotheses between experts (N=21) and survey participants (N=733), with 70.5% overall agreement on 12/17 hypotheses. Physicians demonstrated the lowest level of agreement with the expert panel at 88% (15/17) disagreement, with the hypotheses “H8: Digitization in the health care system will free up jobs,” and “H6: Digitization in the health care system will empower the patients,” perceived to be in profound disagreement (P=.036 and P<.001, respectively). Conclusions: Despite the firm agreement among participants and experts regarding the impact of digitization on the health care system, physicians demonstrated a more negative attitude. We assume that this might be a factor contributing to the slow adoption of digitization in practice. Physicians might be struggling with changing power structures, so future measures to transform the market should involve them to a larger degree.

Background: The German healthcare sector is in the process of being disrupted by digitization. Universities are asked to reflect on the con-sequences and develop strategies to prepare their medical students for a digitalized health care sector. The current state of research does not systematically record the associated activities of individual medical faculties in Germany. Objective: This study was designed to survey the status-quo of how German medical faculties view the digitization progress and to what extend digital capability building is already integrated into the curricula. Methods: A questionnaire with three focus areas was developed: Firstly, the general view of the medical faculties on digitization; secondly, con-crete measures to prepare students for digital change and thirdly, the overarching organizational and regulatory conditions. The data was collected through short, questionnaire-based telephone interviews among those responsible for the curriculum at their faculty. The datasets collected were anonymized and statistically evaluated. Results: 30 interviews were conducted. The majority of faculty repres-entatives agreed that digitization will change the role of physicians (87% agreement). Changes caused by individual digitization trends were however viewed to be less likely, e.g., whether medical expertise will become less important due to digital assistance systems (20% agree-ment), whether physician positions will be replaced by robots and al-gorithms (7% agreement), or whether hierarchies in hospitals will flatten (13% agreement). Digitization was seen to be of major importance for medical studies (93% agreement). Associated content should be given a higher priority in the curriculum (87% agreement). Two-thirds of faculty representatives believed that overarching institutions such as politics and medical associations ought to have more concrete plans for imple-menting the digital transformation and that innovations should be im-plemented in practice faster. Conclusion: While most faculty representatives attach great importance to the digitization of the health care system for university education, various questions about structural teaching measures to prepare stu-dents for the digital change show that there is no uniform education of medical students for a digitized health care system. We were also able to show that most faculty representatives are dissatisfied with the reg-ulatory and organizational conditions of digitization in the medical sector.

Background: Nonadherence to medication is a driver of morbidity and mortality, and complex medication regimens in patients with chronic diseases foster the problem. Digital technology might help, but despite numerous solutions being developed, none are currently widely used, and acceptance rates remain low, especially among the elderly. Objective: This study aimed to better understand and operationalize how new digital solutions can be evaluated. Particularly, the goal was to identify factors that help digital approaches targeting adherence to become more widely accepted. Methods: A qualitative study using a conceptual grounded theory approach was conducted. We included patients aged 65 years and older who routinely took new oral anticoagulants. To generate theses about the digital competencies of the target group with daily medication intake, face-to-face interviews were conducted, recorded, and anonymized. After coding the interviews, categories were generated, discussed, and combined with several theses until saturation of the statements was reached. Results: The methodological approach led to the finding that after interviews in 20 of 77 potentially available patients, a saturation of statements was reached. The average patient’s age was 75 years, and 50% (10/20) of the subjects were female. The data identified five main coding categories—Diseases and medicine, Technology, Autonomy, Patient narrative, and Attitude toward technologies—each including positive and negative subcategories. Main categories and subcategories were summarized as Adherence Radar, which can be considered as a framework to assess the potential of adherence solutions in the process of prototyping and can be applied to all adherence tools in a holistic manner. Conclusions: The Adherence Radar can be used to increase the acceptance rate of digital solutions targeting adherence. For a patient-centric design, an app should be adapted to the individual patient’s needs. According to our results, this application should be based on gender and educational background as well as the individual physician-patient relationship. If used in a proper, individualized manner, digital adherence solutions could become a new cornerstone for the treatment of chronically ill individuals.