How a health tech taxonomy could unlock a more efficient and effective process for innovation within the NHS.
As health technology (health tech) and the role it can play in transforming the health service becomes vital to the future of the NHS, the need for a clearer definition and segmentation of what “health tech” comprises, and the way we assess the different elements of this wide collection of products, is becoming more important.
The recent commitment from Health Secretary Wes Streeting to embed innovation at the heart of the upcoming 10-Year Health Plan demonstrates the NHS’s ambition to use technology to transform patient care.[1] Yet, the lack of differentiation around the umbrella term “health tech” is a significant challenge; not just for innovators, but also for commissioners and policymakers who are tasked with assessing and adopting new solutions. Without a shared understanding, we risk slowing down innovation that could deliver better outcomes for patients and unlock greater efficiency for the health service.
The Health Tech Alliance, a coalition of health tech companies and bodies from across the NHS and wider health system, believes that a high level taxonomy of health tech is essential, given the eclectic mix of products the term encompasses. By establishing clearer distinctions between the very different technologies we can support innovators in navigating the complex evaluation landscape, help commissioners make more informed decisions, and ultimately ensure that patients benefit from the most effective modern technologies.
Why the term “health tech” needs redefining
It is encouraging that so much innovation is being developed that not only has potential to transform patient services but to improve productivity and efficiency in the health service. However, in recent years, “health tech” has become a catch-all term, used interchangeably with “MedTech” and applied to everything from traditional medical devices to the latest digital health innovations.
The lack of clear distinction leads to something of a “one-size-fits-all” approach to product evaluation and adoption which is neither proportionate nor efficient. For instance, the wide differences between digital apps, personalised products (such as ostomy and continence care), replacement joints and commodities such as lancets, means each group needs a fundamentally different approach to evaluation and route to market.
Some health tech, such as implants or diagnostics, require rigorous, long-term evidence of safety and efficacy. Others, like personalised digital apps or software platforms, should be evaluated more on usability, data security, and clinical effectiveness. AI-enabled technologies are now included in most of these categories, blurring the lines further.
We support the recent call from the Office for Life Sciences for a “formal redefinition of UK HealthTech to encapsulate emerging technologies and reduce ambiguity surrounding what does and does not constitute HealthTech activity”.[2] NICE and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) community are at the early stages of thinking about how this might be implemented, but the direction of travel is clear.
A practical breakdown for smarter procurement and evaluation
To streamline health tech procurement and evaluation, we have to move beyond the idea of health tech as a single, catch-all category. Instead, we should adopt a practical, implementable high-level taxonomy across all relevant players that distinguishes between key categories. Through a series of recent workshops with partners from industry and the wider health system, including NICE, DHSC, NHSE and local procurement leaders, the Health Tech Alliance now offers this “straw man” of how such a taxonomy might be developed:
Complex free-standing equipment
A huge range of long-standing and innovative devices including dialysis machines, scanners and so many more.
Commodities
This category could cover a range of both simple and complex devices but those which are generally not patient specific, from simple dressings through to complex surgical equipment. Some will have a digital element, others will not. Clearly the assessment will vary greatly across these sub categories.
Implantables
This will also need further refinement to differentiate between those which have no digital element e.g. joint replacements and those which do, such as pacemakers.
Diagnostics
Including in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDs) such as blood grouping reagents, pregnancy test kits, and hepatitis B test kits.
Digital health and software
Standalone software, clinical decision support, mobile apps, and remote consultation platforms. This category includes tools for both prevention and wellbeing, as well as diagnosis and treatment.
Personalised Products
Products which need to be specific to individual patients such as ostomy and incontinence technologies, and some digitally enhanced wound care.
Robotics
An increasing field which requires complex evaluation.
Telemedicine platforms and remote monitoring systems
These technologies facilitate care delivery and often require bespoke evaluation.
AI-enabled and connecting technologies
Software and platforms that use AI to drive other devices, support decision-making, or connect patients and clinicians.
Each of these categories has different risk profiles and intended uses, which means they need tailored evaluation pathways. For example, digital health tools may benefit from lighter-touch, faster approval routes, while implants and complex robotics need more robust scrutiny.
Unlocking efficiency and better outcomes
Adopting a clear taxonomy would enable the NHS to tailor evaluation processes according to the specific risks and benefits of each health tech category. This approach would help streamline approval routes, eliminate unnecessary delays, and reduce costs for innovators. Commissioners would have greater clarity and confidence in their decision-making, while patients would gain quicker access to appropriate new technologies.
A more precise definition of “health tech” is more than a semantic exercise; it is the foundation for a smarter, more proportionate, and ultimately more effective process for evaluating innovation in the NHS. By introducing practical categories, we can accelerate the adoption of new technologies, enhance transparency, and improve data collection and communication across the health system. This will ensure that the most suitable innovations reach those who need them most, without unnecessary barriers. We look forward to working further with all our partners to refine this approach.
By Dame Barbara Hakin, Chair, Health Tech Alliance
References
[1] 10 Year Health Plan: Building a health service fit for the future
[2] Unlocking the potential of UK HealthTech report, OLS
