Cost-effectiveness of digital health in primary care: a systematic review.

In 30 seconds

This systematic review examined the cost-effectiveness of digital health interventions compared with usual care among adults receiving primary care. Searches identified 54 eligible studies, including trial-based and model-based economic evaluations across a range of clinical areas. Most studies reported favourable economic outcomes, and digital health was frequently judged cost-effective. However, findings varied according to the intervention, population, evaluation method, and time horizon, limiting direct comparisons across studies.

Key findings

• The review included 54 studies evaluating digital health interventions against usual care in adult primary care populations.
• Most studies reported cost-effective results, although economic outcomes varied across interventions, populations, methods, and time horizons.
• The evidence base included trial- and model-based evaluations, with substantial methodological heterogeneity.

Why it matters

Economic evidence can inform decisions about whether digital health interventions are suitable for implementation in primary care, beyond evidence of clinical effectiveness alone. The review suggests that many interventions may offer favourable economic outcomes, but variation in evaluation methods makes it difficult to compare results or draw consistent conclusions across clinical areas.

What to keep in mind

The review notes rapidly evolving digital health terminology, exclusion of grey literature, substantial methodological heterogeneity, and possible selection bias related to digital literacy.