Utilization of Innovative Medical Technologies In German Inpatient Care: Does Evidence Matter?
Abstract Background: The reimbursement of new technologies in inpatient care is not always linked to a requirement for evidence-based evaluation of patient benefit. In Germany, every new technology approved for market was until recently reimbursable unless explicitly excluded. It was therefore unclear whether the implementation of innovative technologies is guided by scientific evidence. This work aimed to explore the relationship between clinical evidence and utilization for 25 selected technologies in German inpatient care.Methods: Different methods were applied. A systematic search for evidence published between 2003 and 2017 was conducted in four bibliographic databases; clinical trial registries; resources for clinical guidelines; and health technology assessment - databases. Information was also collected on funding mechanisms and safety notices. Utilization was measured by hospital cases captured in claims data. The body of evidence, funding and safety notices per technology were analysed descriptively. The relationship between utilization and evidence was explored empirically using a multilevel regression analysis.Results: The number of included publications per technology ranges from two to 498. For all technologies, non-comparative studies form the bulk of the evidence. The number of randomised controlled clinical trials per technology ranges from zero to 19. Some technologies were utilized for several years without an adequate evidence base. A relationship between evidence and utilization could be shown for several but not all technologies.Conclusions: This study reveals a mixed picture regarding the evidence available for new technologies, and the relationship between the development of evidence and the use of technologies over time. Although the influence of funding and safety notices requires further investigation, these results re-emphasize the need for strengthening market approval standards and HTA pathways as well as approaches such as “coverage with evidence development”.