UNSTRUCTURED
International deployment of remote monitoring and virtual care (RMVC) technologies would efficiently harness their positive impact on outcomes. Since Canada and the UK have similar populations, healthcare systems, and digital health landscapes, transferring digital health innovations between them should be relatively straightforward. Yet, examples of successful attempts are scarce. In a workshop, we identified six differences that may complicate RMVC transfer between Canada and the UK, and provide recommendations for addressing. These key differences include: 1) minority groups, (2) physical geography, (3) clinical pathways, (4) value propositions, (5) governmental priorities and support for digital innovation, (6) regulatory pathways. We detail four broad recommendations to plan for sustainability including: the need to formally consider how highlighted country-specific recommendations may impact RMVC and contingency planning to overcome challenges; the need to map which pathways are available as an innovator to support cross-country transfer; the need to report on and apply learnings from regulatory barriers and facilitators so that everyone may benefit; and explore existing guidance to successfully transfer digital health solutions while developing further guidance (e.g., extending the NASSS framework for cross-country transfer). Finally, we present an ecosystem readiness checklist. Considering these recommendations will contribute to successful international deployment and increased positive impact of RMVC technologies.
International deployment of remote monitoring and virtual care (RMVC) technologies would efficiently harness their positive impact on outcomes. Since Canada and the United Kingdom have similar populations, health care systems, and digital health landscapes, transferring digital health innovations between them should be relatively straightforward. Yet examples of successful attempts are scarce. In a workshop, we identified 6 differences that may complicate RMVC transfer between Canada and the United Kingdom and provided recommendations for addressing them. These key differences include (1) minority groups, (2) physical geography, (3) clinical pathways, (4) value propositions, (5) governmental priorities and support for digital innovation, and (6) regulatory pathways. We detail 4 broad recommendations to plan for sustainability, including the need to formally consider how highlighted country-specific recommendations may impact RMVC and contingency planning to overcome challenges; the need to map which pathways are available as an innovator to support cross-country transfer; the need to report on and apply learnings from regulatory barriers and facilitators so that everyone may benefit; and the need to explore existing guidance to successfully transfer digital health solutions while developing further guidance (eg, extending the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, sustainability framework for cross-country transfer). Finally, we present an ecosystem readiness checklist. Considering these recommendations will contribute to successful international deployment and an increased positive impact of RMVC technologies. Future directions should consider characterizing additional complexities associated with global transfer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.