Buying inside a public hospital is not choosing a product — it is writing a document. And the decision is made in that document, long before any bids are on the table.
The problem is that virtual reality in healthcare has no standard specification yet. The result is tender documents asking for the wrong things: screen resolution instead of declared intended purpose, number of games instead of regulatory framing, and then a clause demanding a "certified therapeutic solution" that no honest supplier can meet — because it does not exist.
This is the skeleton we would use. Not to favour us: to force whoever answers to tell the truth.
1. Start with the purpose, not the hardware
The question that orders everything else is what this will actually be used for in this service. Comfort during a procedure is not the same as cognitive stimulation in a care home, and neither is the same as supporting guided exercise.
Ask the bidder for the product's declared intended purpose as it appears in the technical documentation — not the list of applications in the brochure. They are different documents and they sometimes say different things.
2. Regulatory framing: ask for what is verifiable
This is where tender documents slip most. Three formulations that work:
- "State whether the product is a medical device and, if so, its class, registration number and competent authority." A registration number can be checked; the word "certified" cannot.
- "State whether it bears the CE mark and under which regulation."
- "State whether a notified body was involved and, if so, which one."
That last one is the most useful and almost never appears. For a Class I device that is non-sterile and has no measuring function there is no notified body — conformity is declared by the manufacturer. A bidder who answers that question with a notified body number is either in a higher class or making it up. Either way, you learned something.
Also ask for the EU Declaration of Conformity and the device label as annexes. Any serious manufacturer hands those over.
Do not write "solution certified as a therapeutic medical device". That category does not exist, and the clause either excludes everyone or forces someone to lie in order to answer.
3. Separate the base product from the modules
Many systems are modular, and not every module is in the same regulatory state. One line handles it:
"State which components of the system are covered by the medical device registration and which are not."
If the answer is "all of them", ask for the document.
4. Data: where it lives, and what leaves the device
Three closed questions, with no room for prose:
- What patient data is collected, if any?
- What leaves the device, to where, and on what lawful basis?
- Does the system work without an internet connection during a session?
The last is operational and regulatory at once: a service with patchy Wi-Fi cannot depend on streaming, and a system that runs offline has less exposed surface.
5. Contraindications and safety
Ask for the list of contraindications and the procedure for reporting serious incidents. A supplier with neither has not thought about it — and that is the most useful information a tender response can give you.
6. Operation: who uses it, with what training
- Who is the intended user?
- Is training included? Is it on site?
- Can one person manage several headsets at once?
- Who chooses the content for each patient?
7. Total cost, not unit price
Ask for three-year cost with everything in it: licence, headsets, content, updates, replacements, support and training. And ask explicitly what happens at the end of the contract — if the equipment becomes unusable, that is part of the price.
8. Evidence: separate the two things
One clause separates the serious from the rest:
"State what published evidence exists about THIS product and what evidence is about the technology in general, clearly distinguishing the two."
Most suppliers only have the second. There is nothing wrong with that — as long as they say so.
What not to ask for
- Resolution, field of view and pixel counts. It is the same handful of headsets on the market; specifying this distinguishes nobody and excludes solutions by accident.
- Number of scenarios. A hundred bad ones are worth less than twenty appropriate ones.
- Certifications that do not exist. See above.
If you want to check our own answers
What we would answer is public: RVer's base product is registered with Infarmed as a Class I medical device, no. CDM 94571546, and bears the CE mark under MDR 2017/745, with no notified body, because for a Class I non-sterile device without a measuring function there is none. The RVer Motion, RVer Neuro and RVer Exposure modules are in development and are not covered by that registration.
The contraindications are on the FAQ page, the scope of the registration is in science and regulation, and the user manual is open.
If you are writing a tender document and would like someone to read it before it goes out, we will tell you what is impossible to comply with — even when the clause would favour us.
On the question that separates suppliers when someone claims savings, see the ROI nobody can prove.