[Does the Innovation Fund Improve Healthcare Provision? A Critical Assessment of the Status of Implementing Successful Innovation Fund Projects into Healthcare Practice]. / Verbessert der Innovationsfonds die Versorgung? Eine kritische Bestandsaufnahme zum Stand der Implementierung erfolgreicher Innovationsfondsprojekte in die Versorgungspraxis.

INTRODUCTION: Since 2015, the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA)'s Innovation Fund has been supporting projects in health services research and new health service models ("Neue Versorgungsformen", NVF). By the end of 2022, 211 projects in the NVF category had been funded. A key objective is the transfer of successful projects into standard care. This article analyzes previous projects regarding their incorporation into routine care based on transfer recommendations of the Innovation Fund Committee ("Innovationsausschuss" IA). METHOD: Descriptive analysis of all projects completed by August 1, 2023 with transfer recommendations in the "NVF" funding stream. Presentation by topic, project duration, time until IA transfer decision, categorization, and number of institutions and organizations (recipients) addressed per project, their feedback published on the G-BA website, response rates per recipient group, and a content classification and interpretation of exemplary feedback. Recommendations based on the results and their discussion in an expert workshop. RESULTS: Out of 57 NVF projects, 17 had a transfer recommendation. A total of 57 feedback responses were received from a total of 431 recipients addressed by the IA across these projects. Response rates varied significantly. One-third of inquiries to the G-BA and its member organizations received a response (31%), while only every fifth inquiry to federal states (18%) and professional societies (18%) got a response. Less than one in ten inquiries to the Federal Ministry of Health (8%), administrative bodies (6%), and the German Medical Association (0%) received a response. Project-specific feedback within a recipient group was often contradictory or limited to regional scope. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The transfer process reveals significant structural and procedural obstacles regarding the incorporation of projects evaluated as successful into routine health care. To ensure that funding from the innovation fund is most effectively used, there needs to be a realistic chance of successful transfer of positive project outcomes into routine care. The DNVF recommends stronger involvement of rule-competent institutions, mandatory publication of responses, structured moderation of the transfer process, expanding types of selective contracts, financing of implementation phases and of studies drawing on results across successful NVF projects.

[Routine Practice Data for Health Care Analyses: Part 3 of the Manual]. / Versorgungsnahe Daten für Versorgungsanalysen ­ Teil 3 des Manuals.

Analyses of health and health care (hereafter referred to as "health care analyses") usually aim to make transparent the structures, processes, results and interrelationships of health care and to record the degree to which health care systems and their actors have achieved their goals. Health care-related data are an indispensable source of data for many health care analyses. A prerequisite for the examination of a degree of goal achievement is first of all an agreement on those goals that are to be achieved by the system and its substructures, as well as the identification of the determinants of the achievement of the objectives. Primarily it must be examined how safely, effectively and patient-centred systems, facilities and service providers are operating. It also addresses issues of need, accessibility, utilisation, timeliness, appropriateness, patient safety, coordination, continuity, and health economic efficiency and equity of health care. The results of health care include system services (outputs), on the one hand, and results (outcomes), on the other, whereby the results (patient-reported outcomes) and experiences (patient-reported experiences) reported are of particular importance. Health care analyses answer basic questions of health care research: who does what, when, how, why and with which resources and effects in routine health care. Health care analyses thus provide the necessary findings and key figures to further develop health care in order to improve the quality of health care. The applications range from capacity analyses to following innovations up to the concept of regional and supra-regional monitoring of the quality of care given to the population. Given the progress of digitalisation in Health Care, direct data from the care processes will be increasingly available for health care research. This can support care givers significantly if the findings of the studies are applied precisely and correctly within an adequate methodological frame. This can lead to measurable improved health care quality for patients. Data from the process of health care provision have a high potential. Their use needs the same scientific scrutiny as in all other scientific studies.

[Necessity and Ways to Develop Care Goals for the Health System in Germany - a Position Paper of the DNVF]. / Notwendigkeit und Wege zur Entwicklung von Versorgungszielen für das Gesundheitssystem in Deutschland ­ ein Positionspapier des DNVF.

Goals for health and health care are an indispensable basic requirement for a functioning health care system. The dilemma of the German health care system is that it has not been designed in a planned way, but that it has grown historically. In recent years, it has developed through the free play of forces into what it is today. The OECD characterizes the current state as follows: The costs of the German health system do not correspond to the often only average health outcomes for the population. To meet the legal requirements (especially SGB V §§ 12, 27 and 70), health care/the health system in Germany needs concrete goals. An orientation towards health care goals entails measures on all levels of health care: on the macro level (overall system/total population), on the meso level (subdivided according to regions, specific population groups, etc.) as well as on the micro level (patients and health care providers). Based on national and international experiences, this position paper of the DNVF e.V. (German Network for health services research) shows the potential of how operationalised health care targets can ensure effective, affordable and high-quality health care. The coalition agreement of the current government propagates a reorientation with patient-related health care goals. Now it is important to derive concrete and realisable goals from this declaration of intent and to involve all important groups in the process. In addition, values and ethical standards for implementation shall be agreed upon in this process. The Health Ministry (BMG) should facilitate and promote the process of societal will-building for the definition of national health care goals. This requires a clear political will. As a result, the National Health Care Goals are available at the end of the process, which are published and maintained together with evidence-based facts as well as valid and resilient data in a Manual "National Health Care Goals". The operational responsibility for implementation could lie with the newly to be founded Federal Institute of Public Health, as already announced in the agreement of the governing coalition. The DNVF is willing to actively participate in the development of health care targets.

[Characteristics of Innovation Fund-supported Intervention Studies: Review and Document Analysis of Study Protocols, Publications and Final Reports]. / Charakteristika von durch den Innovationsfonds geförderten Interventionsstudien: Review und Dokumentenanalyse von Studienprotokollen, Publikationen und Abschlussberichten.

This prospectively registered review characterizes 50 intervention studies from the 1st wave of the Innovation Fund based on study protocols or original articles, among other sources. The mainly (randomized) controlled intervention studies included predominantly adults/seniors in ambulatory care without a regional focus and analyzed treatment processes, clinical and patient outcomes as outcomes. The substantial lack of study protocols and methodological details (e. g., sample size planning) reveals (avoidable) methodological problems regarding the scientific quality of the funded studies.