Engage! Engage! Engage!

Digital health is dynamic, and keeping engaged with its potential to transform health systems is vital. Issues (such as interoperability of information systems) range from the local to global; disease patterns keep changing, and so does the need for improved disease surveillance systems; health and care organizations keep evolving and digital health needs to adapt accordingly; digital technologies provide more affordable solutions to more people; and financial and human resources will always be insufficient.

Risks of investing in digital health need identifying and to be managed. Having a strategic vision, and a methodology for managing investment appraisal, are necessary but not sufficient conditions. Ways in which change is implemented, skills developed, partnership ecosystems nurtured, and the understanding of technology and innovations kept current, need to be appropriate for the country and context in question, whether that is local, national, or international.

This overview, and the supporting Guidance for Investing in Digital Health and the Digital Health Impact Framework, are aligned. They provide links to a continuing body of research, best practices and case studies. These are intended to be updated over time as the body of evidence grows. They are also intended to be increasingly relevant to a wide range of different users in different countries. The Guidance aims to help countries through the cycle of developing their own strategic plans for digital health and keeping them refreshed.

In learning from others, Malaysia offers an example of how a long-term. 23-year, flexible framework can give a consistent direction of travel, although adaptations are inevitable as technology changes. Its use of Innovation Hubs and social media indicate some effective innovations. Taipei,China too offers an example of a consistent UHC focus supported by a single National Health Insurance scheme that depends on an infrastructure to support rapid payment of eClaims. Major benefits will now accrue as a rich picture of the workings of the health system can now be analysed. Vietnam has a rich mix of government, private sector and donor organisations supporting progress in digital health solutions.

Every country has its successes and failures in digital health. Engagement with these issues is crucial. Sharing which investments have worked well and which ones have not, whether the focus is at national, district, facility or community level helps build understanding. In learning how to use the Guidance and DHIF, it is important that they must be tailored to local requirements. The next step may be to take a particular project, program or policy and engage with applying the cycle of good practice and also learn about DHIF by applying it. Making a start, then building up to engage with larger and more complex digital health investment challenges is a pragmatic way to proceed.