Standardized assessment of evidence supporting the adoption of mobile health solutions: A Clinical Consensus Statement of the ESC Regulatory Affairs Committee: Developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), the Association of Cardiovascular Nursing & Allied Professions (ACNAP) of the ESC, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC, the ESC Young Community, the ESC Working Group on e-Cardiology, the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice, the ESC Council of Cardio-Oncology, the ESC Council on Hypertension, the ESC Patient Forum, the ESC Digital Health Committee, and the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC).

Mobile health (mHealth) solutions have the potential to improve self-management and clinical care. For successful integration into routine clinical practice, healthcare professionals (HCPs) need accepted criteria helping the mHealth solutions' selection, while patients require transparency to trust their use. Information about their evidence, safety and security may be hard to obtain and consensus is lacking on the level of required evidence. The new Medical Device Regulation is more stringent than its predecessor, yet its scope does not span all intended uses and several difficulties remain. The European Society of Cardiology Regulatory Affairs Committee set up a Task Force to explore existing assessment frameworks and clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence. This knowledge was used to propose criteria with which HCPs could evaluate mHealth solutions spanning diagnostic support, therapeutics, remote follow-up and education, specifically for cardiac rhythm management, heart failure and preventive cardiology. While curated national libraries of health apps may be helpful, their requirements and rigour in initial and follow-up assessments may vary significantly. The recently developed CEN-ISO/TS 82304-2 health app quality assessment framework has the potential to address this issue and to become a widely used and efficient tool to help drive decision-making internationally. The Task Force would like to stress the importance of co-development of solutions with relevant stakeholders, and maintenance of health information in apps to ensure these remain evidence-based and consistent with best practice. Several general and domain-specific criteria are advised to assist HCPs in their assessment of clinical evidence to provide informed advice to patients about mHealth utilization.

Preference Testing in Medical Devices: Current Framework and Regulatory Gaps.

Preference testing is a valuable source of information that can be provided by both healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients (users). It can be used to improve the design and development of medical devices by feeding into device usability and, ultimately, risk management. Furthermore, it can aid with selecting the most appropriate clinical endpoints to be used in the clinical evaluation of a device and increase patient engagement by incorporating patient-relevant outcomes. Preference testing is widely conducted in the food industry but is not widespread in the medical field due to limited guidelines and a lack of regulatory framework. As such, manufacturers may be unaware of the benefits of preference testing and fail to take full advantage of it, or conversely, may use inappropriate methodology and/or analyses and consequently fail to collect meaningful data. In this position paper, we aim to highlight the benefits and uses of preference testing, along with potential methods that could be used for preference testing of medical devices. A key step towards the wider implementation of preference testing in medical devices is for the publication of international standards and guidelines for the collection, assessment, and implementation of preference data into the life cycle of a medical device.