Why the study?
Digital health advanced dramatically since 2022, warranting a review of its clinical use, implementation challenges, and social implications in heart failure.
Digital technologies, including AI and remote monitoring, offer significant potential to improve heart failure care and outcomes, provided they are integrated into structured clinical pathways and designed to mitigate health inequities.
Digital health in HF may aid management; this review leaves open optimal implementation and equity.
Digital health has advanced dramatically since 2022 and will continue until 2026; this paper is a review of clinical use, implementation challenges, and social implications of digital health for patients with heart failure (HF). Literature was reviewed from January 1, 2022 to March 31, 2026. Priority was placed on publications by major international organizations (World Health Organization [WHO], American Heart Association [AHA], European Society of Cardiology [ESC] etc.) and peer-reviewed indexed journals focused on HF including diagnosis, risk stratification, surveillance, self-care, and health disparities. Artificial intelligence (AI) appears to improve ECG screening, imaging interpretation, and multimodal phenotyping and short term risk prediction. Structured remote monitoring systems also have been demonstrated to reduce hospitalizations and mortality when applied within defined clinical pathways. Telemedicine and wearable devices appear to be effective tools to support patient self-management and enhance follow up. However, both are highly dependent on many factors, including: digital literacy, reimbursement, staffing levels, device compatibility, and institutional structure. In addition, the literature suggests that a digital transformation will exacerbate existing inequities unless these technologies are designed to address the barriers of age, language, socioeconomic status, algorithmic bias, and unequal access to technology and the internet.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marusza et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: