Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Digitale Medizin in der neurologischen Forschung – zwischen Hype und Evidenz

Digital medicine in neurological research—Between hype and evidence

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Nervenarzt Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Die rasant voranschreitende Entwicklung digitaler Medizin und Gesundheitstechnologien in der Neurologie birgt sowohl erhebliches Potenzial als auch Herausforderungen. Dieser Artikel fasst grundlegende Aspekte digitaler Medizin mit Bezug auf neurologische Forschung zusammen und beleuchtet Anwendungsbeispiele für digitale Technologien in der neurologischen Forschung.

Ziel der Arbeit

Bereitstellung eines fundierten Überblicks über die aktuellen digitalen Entwicklungen in der Neurologie und deren Einfluss auf die neurologische Forschung.

Material und Methoden

In dieser narrativen Übersichtsarbeit wurden Arbeiten aus verschiedenen Quellen und Referenzen zu digitaler Medizin und Gesundheitstechnologien in der Neurologie zusammengetragen und analysiert.

Ergebnisse und Diskussion

Die vorliegenden Daten zeigen, dass digitale Gesundheitstechnologien und digitale Therapeutika das Potenzial haben, die neurologische Versorgung und Forschung entscheidend zu prägen. Es wird jedoch deutlich, dass eine kritische Bewertung und eine evidenzbasierte Annäherung an diese Technologien erforderlich sind, um ihren tatsächlichen Wert für die Neurologie zu bestimmen.

Abstract

Background

The rapid advancement of digital medicine and health technologies in neurology offers both significant potential and challenges. This article outlines fundamental aspects of digital medicine related to neurological research and highlights application examples of digital technologies in neurological research.

Aim

To provide a comprehensive overview of current digital developments in neurology and their impact on neurological research.

Material and methods

In this narrative review articles from various sources and references related to digital medicine and health technologies in neurology were compiled and analyzed.

Results and discussion

The data presented indicate that digital health technologies and digital therapeutics have the potential to decisively shape neurological care and research; however, it is emphasized that a critical evaluation and evidence-based approach to these technologies are essential to determine their actual value in neurology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Allen JA, Pasnoor M, Dimachkie MM et al (2021) Quantifying treatment-related fluctuations in CIDP: results of the GRIPPER study. Neurology 96:e1876–e1886. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000011703

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Balakrishnan P, Groenberg J, Jacyshyn-Owen E et al (2022) Demographic patterns of MS patients using BRISA: an MS-specific app in Germany. J Pers Med 12:1100. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12071100

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berron D, Ziegler G, Vieweg P et al (2022) Feasibility of digital memory assessments in an unsupervised and remote study setting. Front Digit Health 4:

  4. Cook M, Pasnoor M, Ajroud-Driss S et al (2023) CIDP prognosis in patients with IVIG treatment-related fluctuations. Muscle Nerve 67:69–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.27746

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dahlhausen F, Zinner M, Bieske L et al (2022) There’s an app for that, but nobody’s using it: Insights on improving patient access and adherence to digital therapeutics in Germany. Digit Health. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076221104672

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dang A, Arora D, Rane P (2020) Role of digital therapeutics and the changing future of healthcare. J Family Med Prim Care 9:2207. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_105_20

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dawson W (2022) Assessing acceptability, cost, and efficacy of STELLA-support via technology: living and learning with advancing AD. clinicaltrials.gov

    Google Scholar 

  8. Digital medicine society the playbook—digital clinical measures. https://playbook.dimesociety.org/. Zugegriffen: 7. Aug. 2023

  9. Dillenseger A, Weidemann ML, Trentzsch K et al (2021) Digital biomarkers in multiple sclerosis. Brain Sci 11:1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11111519

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. FDA-NIH Biomarker Working Group (2021) BEST (Biomarkers, Endpoints, and other Tools) resource—glossary. Food and drug administration (US)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Howard JF, Utsugisawa K, Benatar M et al (2017) Safety and efficacy of eculizumab in anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive refractory generalised myasthenia gravis (REGAIN): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol 16:976–986. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30369-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kourtis LC, Regele OB, Wright JM, Jones GB (2019) Digital biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease: the mobile/wearable devices opportunity. Npj Digit Med 2:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-019-0084-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lam K‑H, Twose J, McConchie H et al (2022) Smartphone-derived keystroke dynamics are sensitive to relevant changes in multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 29:522–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mace M, Mutalib SA, Ogrinc M et al (2022) GripAble: An accurate, sensitive and robust digital device for measuring grip strength. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. https://doi.org/10.1177/20556683221078455

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Makin S (2019) The emerging world of digital therapeutics. Nature 573:S106–S109. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-02873-1

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Masanneck L, Butryn M, Nelke C, Repple J, Meier U, Düzel E, Meuth SG, Pawlitzki M (2023) A study of the geographic accessibility of outpatient memory clinics in Germany. Dtsch Arztebl Int. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.m2023.0149

  17. Masanneck L, Gieseler P, Gordon WJ et al (2023) Evidence from ClinicalTrials.gov on the growth of Digital Health Technologies in neurology trials. Npj Digit Med 6:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00767-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Masanneck L, Räuber S, Schroeter CB et al (2023) Driving time-based identification of gaps in specialised care coverage: an example of neuroinflammatory diseases in Germany. Digit Health. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076231152989

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Masanneck L, Voth J, Huntemann N et al (2023) Introducing electronic monitoring of disease activity in patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (EMDA CIDP): trial protocol of a proof of concept study. Neurol Res Pract 5:39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-023-00267-3

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Meier IB, Buegler M, Harms R et al (2021) Using a digital Neuro signature to measure longitudinal individual-level change in alzheimer’s disease: the altoida large cohort study. Npj Digit Med 4:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00470-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Merchant KCTTI Recommendations: Decentralized Clinical Trials.

  22. Rose K (2021) Collaborative research: learning and improving alzheimer’s patient-caregiver relationships via smart healthcare technology. clinicaltrials.gov

    Google Scholar 

  23. Servais L, Camino E, Clement A et al (2021) First regulatory qualification of a novel digital endpoint in duchenne muscular dystrophy: a multi-stakeholder perspective on the impact for patients and for drug development in neuromuscular diseases. DIB 5:183–190. https://doi.org/10.1159/000517411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stern AD, Brönneke J, Debatin JF et al (2022) Advancing digital health applications: priorities for innovation in real-world evidence generation. Lancet Digit Health 4:e200–e206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00292-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Woelfle T, Bourguignon L, Lorscheider J et al (2023) Wearable sensor technologies to assess motor functions in people with multiple sclerosis: systematic scoping review and perspective. J Med Internet Res 25:e44428. https://doi.org/10.2196/44428

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ziemssen T, Kern R, Voigt I, Haase R (2020) Data collection in multiple sclerosis: the MSDS approach. Front Neurol 11

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Neurologie, Medizinische Fakultät und Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland

    Lars Masanneck,  Marc G. Pawlitzki &  Sven G. Meuth

  2. Hasso-Plattner-Institut, Potsdam, Deutschland

    Lars Masanneck

Authors
  1. Lars Masanneck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marc G. Pawlitzki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sven G. Meuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Lars Masanneck or Sven G. Meuth.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

L. Masanneck, M. Pawlitzki und S.G. Meuth geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autor/-innen keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

Hinweis des Verlags

Der Verlag bleibt in Hinblick auf geografische Zuordnungen und Gebietsbezeichnungen in veröffentlichten Karten und Institutsadressen neutral.

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Masanneck, L., Pawlitzki, M.G. & Meuth, S.G. Digitale Medizin in der neurologischen Forschung – zwischen Hype und Evidenz. Nervenarzt 95, 230–235 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-023-01581-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-023-01581-6

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation