Background: Digital health interventions have significant potential to improve safety, efficacy, and quality of care, reducing waste in healthcare costs. Despite these premises, the evidence regarding cost and effectiveness of digital tools in health is scarce and limited.Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions and to assess whether the studies meet the established quality criteria.Methods: We queried PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for articles in English published from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 that performed economic evaluations of digital health technologies. The methodological rigorousness of studies was assessed with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2009 checklist.Results: Search identified 1,476 results, 552 of which were selected for abstract and 35 were included in this review. The studies were heterogeneous by country (mostly conducted in upper and upper-middle income countries), type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The qualitative analysis identified the economic and effectiveness evaluation of six different types of interventions: (1) seventeen studies on new video-monitoring service systems; (2) five studies on text messaging interventions; (3) five studies on web platforms and digital health portals; (4) two studies on telephone support; (5) three studies on new mobile phone-based systems and applications; and (6) three studies on digital technologies and innovations.Conclusion: Findings on cost-effectiveness of digital interventions showed a growing body of evidence and suggested a generally favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. However, due to the heterogeneity across study methods, the comparison between interventions still remains difficult. Further research based on a standardized approach is needed in order to methodically analyze incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, and health benefits.

Background: Patient portals are becoming increasingly popular worldwide even though their impact on individual health and health system efficiency is still unclear. Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize evidence on the impact of patient portals on health outcomes and health care efficiency, and to examine user characteristics, attitudes, and satisfaction. Methods: We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases for articles published from January 1, 2013, to October 31, 2019. Eligible studies were primary studies reporting on the impact of patient portal adoption in relation to health outcomes, health care efficiency, and patient attitudes and satisfaction. We excluded studies where portals were not accessible for patients and pilot studies, with the exception of articles evaluating patient attitudes. Results: Overall, 3456 records were screened, and 47 articles were included. Among them, 11 studies addressed health outcomes reporting positive results, such as better monitoring of health status, improved patient-doctor interaction, and improved quality of care. Fifteen studies evaluated the impact of digital patient portals on the utilization of health services with mixed results. Patient characteristics were described in 32 studies, and it was reported that the utilization rate usually increases with age and female gender. Finally, 30 studies described attitudes and defined the main barriers (concerns about privacy and data security, and lack of time) and facilitators (access to clinical data and laboratory results) to the use of a portal. Conclusions: Evidence regarding health outcomes is generally favorable, and patient portals have the potential to enhance the doctor-patient relationship, improve health status awareness, and increase adherence to therapy. It is still unclear whether the use of patient portals improves health service utilization and efficiency.

Background: Digital health interventions have a potential to improve safety, efficacy and quality of care, reducing waste in healthcare costs. Despite premises, the evidence regarding cost and effectiveness of digital tools in health is scarce and limited. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence on cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions and to assess whether the studies meet the established quality criteria. Methods: We queried PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for articles in English published from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2020 that performed economic evaluations of digital health technologies. The methodological rigorousness of studies was assessed with a well-established checklist (CHEERS). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)was calculated when the reviewed study reported related data but did not express the ICER. Results: Searches identified 1476 results, 552 of which were selected for abstract and 35 were included in this review. The studies were heterogeneous by country, type of eHealth intervention, method of implementation, and reporting perspectives. The qualitative analysis identified the economic and effectiveness evaluation of seven different types of interventions: fourteen studies on a new telemedicine service; five on telecounseling; five on teletherapy; two on telemonitoring; five on new mobile applications; two on m-health programs; one on digital platforms and one on electronic health records. Conclusions: Findings on cost-effectiveness of digital interventions showed a growing body of evidence and suggested a generally favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. However, due to the heterogeneity across study methods, the comparison between interventions still remains difficult. Further research based on a standardized approach is needed in order to methodically analyze incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, costs, and health benefits. Key messages: Digital interventions suggested a favorable effect in terms of costs and health outcomes. Digital health interventions have a potential to improve safety, efficacy and quality of care.

Background and objective: The capacity to promote and disseminate the best evidence-based practices in terms of digital health innovations and technologies represents an important goal for countries and governments. To support the digital health maturity across countries the Global Digital Health Partnership (GDHP) was established in 2019. The mission of the GDHP is to facilitate global collaboration and knowledge-sharing in the design of digital health services, through the administration of surveys and white papers.Objective: The scope of this study is to critically analyze and discuss results from the Evidence and Evaluation GDHP Work Stream’s survey, understand how governments and countries intend to address main obstacles to the digital health implementation, identify their strategies for a communication of effective digital health services, and promote the sharing of international based best practices on digital health.Methods: This survey followed a cross-sectional study approach. A multiple-choice questionnaire was designed to gather data. Choices were extracted from research publications retrieved through a rapid review.Results: Out of 29 countries receiving the survey, 10 returned it. On a scale from 1 to 5, eHealth systems/platforms (mean = 3.56) were indicated as the most important tool for centralized infrastructure to collect information on digital health, while primary care (mean = 4.0) represented the most voted item for healthcare services to collect information on digital health. Seven Countries out of 10 identified lack of organization, skepticism of clinicians, and accessibility of the population as a barriers to adopt digital health implementation, resulting to be the most voted items. Finally, the most endorsed priorities in digital health for Countries were the adoption of data-driven approaches (6 Countries), and telehealth (5 Countries).Conclusion: This survey highlighted the main tools and obstacles for countries to promote the implementation of evidence-based digital health innovations. Identifying strategies that would communicate the value of health care information technology to healthcare professionals are particularly imperative. Effective communication programs for clinicians and the general population in addition to improved digital health literacy (both for clinicians and citizens) will be the key for the real implementation of future digital health technologies.

A new digital model for the Italian Integrated Home Care: strengths, barriers, and future implications

Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) represent one of the most common cause of infection and an important burden of disease. The aim of this study was to analyze the results of a six-year HAI point prevalence survey carried out yearly in a teaching acute care hospital from 2013 to 2018, following the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) guidelines. Surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, bloodstream infections, pneumonia, meningitis, and Clostridium difficile infections were considered as risk factors. A total of 328 patients with HAI were detected during the 6-year survey, with an average point prevalence of 5.24% (95% CI: 4.70–5.83%). Respiratory tract infections were the most common, followed by surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, primary bloodstream infections, Clostridium difficile infections, and central nervous system infections. A regression model showed length of stay at the moment of HAI detection, urinary catheter, central venous catheter, and antibiotic therapy to be the most important predictors of HAI prevalence, yielding a significant adjusted coefficient of determination (adjusted R²) of 0.2780. This will provide future infection control programs with specific HAI to focus on in order to introduce a proper prophylaxis and to limit exposure whenever possible.