Teledermatology in times of COVID-19

The Past, the Present and the Future of Teledermatology: A Narrative Review

Teledermatology may be defined as the application of telemedicine to dermatology. According to published data, teledermatology is more widespread in Europe and North America, probably where resources for health care are greater than in other areas of the world. Indeed, teledermatology requires advanced technology to be efficient, as high image quality is necessary to allow the dermatologist to make correct diagnoses. Thanks to the recent advances in this field, teledermatology is become routinary in daily clinical practice. However, its use has been improved over time, overcoming several challenges. The aim of this narrative review is to retrace the almost 30-year history of teledermatology, to address the new challenges posed by advancing technologies such as artificial intelligence and the implications it may have on healthcare.

Quality of life measurement in teledermatology. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Teledermatology

Many events, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have accelerated the implementation of teledermatology pathways within dermatology departments and across healthcare organizations. Quality of Life (QoL) assessment in dermatology is also a rapidly developing field with a gradual shift from theory to practice. The purpose of this paper organized jointly by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on QoL and patient-oriented outcomes and the EADV TF on teledermatology is to present current knowledge about QoL assessment during the use of teledermatology approaches, including data on health-related (HR) QoL instruments used in teledermatology, comparison of influence of different treatment methods on HRQoL after face-to-face and teledermatology consultations and to make practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in teledermatology. The EADV TFs made the following position statements: HRQoL assessment may be an important part in most of teledermatology activities; HRQoL assessment may be easily and effectively performed during teledermatology consultations. It is especially important to monitor HRQoL of patients with chronic skin diseases during lockdowns or in areas where it is difficult to reach a hospital for face-to-face consultation; regular assessment of HRQoL of patients with skin diseases during teledermatology consultations may help to monitor therapy efficacy and visualize individual patient's needs; we recommend the use of the DLQI in teledermatology, including the use of the DLQI app which is available in seven languages; it is important to develop apps for dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments for use in children (for example the CDLQI and InToDermQoL) and for disease-specific instruments.

Teledermatological Follow-Up Consultations in Individual Prevention of Occupational Dermatoses: A Monocentric Feasibility Study on Quality and Satisfaction by Patients and Physicians

Teledermatology has become very popular, and not only due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Patients with occupational skin diseases (OSDs) could also benefit from teledermatology services as part of their follow-up care, but the opportunities and challenges for patients and dermatologists, especially regarding quality and satisfaction, need exploration. In this single-center feasibility study, 215 patients taking part in a tertiary prevention program for OSD were invited to participate. After obtaining consent, a follow-up video consultation appointment with the center's dermatologists was made. Quality and satisfaction with the consultations were evaluated by fully standardized online questionnaires filled in by the patients and dermatologists. A total of 68 teledermatological follow-up consultations were conducted by 10 dermatologists on 42 patients. Half of the dermatologists (50.0%) and 87.6% of the patients were satisfied with the video consultations. However, the lack of physical examination seems to be a problem, especially from the physicians' point of view (75.8%). A total of 66.1% of the dermatologists and 87.5% of the patients saw video consultations as useful supplements to face-to-face consultations. The results of our feasibility study indicate general satisfaction of patients and physicians with teledermatological sessions in occupational dermatology, especially as a useful supplement to face-to-face consultation.

Teledermatology for Common Inflammatory Skin Conditions: The Medicine of the Future?

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic period revolutionized daily clinical practice. Several strategies were adopted by clinicians to avoid reducing treatment for diseases without the risk of spreading the infection. Among the adopted strategies, telemedicine played a key role. In this scenario, several tools were used, including e-mails, phone calls, video calls, support groups, and messages. Fortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic period seems to be at an end. However, the use of teledermatology appears to be an excellent strategy for the future as well. Indeed, several patients may benefit from teledermatology.

OBJECTIVE

In this manuscript, we aim to investigate the use of telemedicine in the dermatological field to point out how this tool may become the mainstay of future medicine. Only the use of teledermatology with common inflammatory skin conditions have been reported herein.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Investigated manuscripts included metanalyses, reviews, letters to the editor, real-life studies, case series, and reports. Manuscripts were identified, screened, and extracted for relevant data following the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 121 records were identified from the analyzed databases. However, only 110 articles were assessed for eligibility. Finally, 92 articles were selected at the end of the literature research for our review.

CONCLUSIONS

Teledermatology should be considered as a viable option for the dermatologist for the future. We believe that the pandemic has strengthened this service, and this will allow for ever better development in the future. Guidelines regarding the use of teledermatology are required as well as additional improvements for the future.

Comparative Analysis of Quality of Life of Patients with Dermatological Problems: Teledermatology Versus Face-to-Face Dermatology

The health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the patients cared for with teledermatology (TD) services was analyzed as compared with face-to-face dermatology (F-F/D) at the hospital. This study was a controlled, non-blinded, intra-level, and multicenter randomized clinical trial, with a 6-month follow-up. A total of 450 patients were randomly assigned to two different groups. The Spanish version of the generic EuroQol-5-dimensions-5-Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire and the specific Skindex-29 questionnaire were used at 0 and 6 months. The number of primary care visits (2.24 TD; 1.68 F-F/D) and number of hospital visits (0.01 TD; 1.48 F-F/D) were statistically significant. It was observed that from month 0 onwards, the users included in the F-F/D group self-perceived a lower HRQoL than the users included in the TD group (Skindex-29 total: p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L VAS = p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L utilities = p ≤ 0.00). At the end of the study, the patients included in the F-F/D group still obtained lower scores in their perception of HRQoL, as compared to those included in the other type of follow-up (Skindex-29 total: p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L VAS = p ≤ 0.00; EQ-5D-5L utilities = p ≤ 0.00). TD was an effective diagnosis and follow-up tool. At the end of the study period, the HRQoL of the patients in both groups was significantly higher as compared to their baseline levels. Additionally, both the general and specific HRQoL perceived by the TD patients was higher than the F-F/D group from the start of the study.

Teledermatology to Facilitate Patient Care Transitions from Inpatient to Outpatient Dermatology: a Mixed Methods Evaluation (Preprint)

Background

Both clinicians and patients have increasingly turned to telemedicine to improve care access, even in physical examination–dependent specialties such as dermatology. However, little is known about whether teledermatology supports effective and timely transitions from inpatient to outpatient care, which is a common care coordination gap.

Objective

Using mixed methods, this study sought to retrospectively evaluate how teledermatology affected clinic capacity, scheduling efficiency, and timeliness of follow-up care for patients transitioning from inpatient to outpatient dermatology care.

Methods

Patient-level encounter scheduling data were used to compare the number and proportion of patients who were scheduled and received in-clinic or video dermatology follow-ups within 14 and 90 days after discharge across 3 phases: June to September 2019 (before teledermatology), June to September 2020 (early teledermatology), and February to May 2021 (sustained teledermatology). The time from discharge to scheduling and completion of patient follow-up visits for each care modality was also compared. Dermatology clinicians and schedulers were also interviewed between April and May 2021 to assess their perceptions of teledermatology for postdischarge patients.

Results

More patients completed follow-up within 90 days after discharge during early (n=101) and sustained (n=100) teledermatology use than at baseline (n=74). Thus, the clinic’s capacity to provide follow-up to patients transitioning from inpatient increased from baseline by 36% in the early (101 from 74) and sustained (100 from 74) teledermatology periods. During early teledermatology use, 61.4% (62/101) of the follow-ups were conducted via video. This decreased significantly to 47% (47/100) in the following year, when COVID-19–related restrictions started to lift (P=.04), indicating more targeted but still substantial use. The proportion of patients who were followed up within the recommended 14 days after discharge did not differ significantly between video and in-clinic visits during the early (33/62, 53% vs 15/39, 38%; P=.15) or sustained (26/53, 60% vs 28/47, 49%; P=.29) teledermatology periods. Interviewees agreed that teledermatology would continue to be offered. Most considered postdischarge follow-up patients to be ideal candidates for teledermatology as they had undergone a recent in-person assessment and might have difficulty attending in-clinic visits because of competing health priorities. Some reported patients needing technological support. Ultimately, most agreed that the choice of follow-up care modality should be the patient’s own.

Conclusions

Teledermatology could be an important tool for maintaining accessible, flexible, and convenient care for recently discharged patients needing follow-up care. Teledermatology increased clinic capacity, even during the pandemic, although the timeliness of care transitions did not improve. Ultimately, the care modality should be determined through communication with patients to incorporate their and their caregivers’ preferences.

Teledermatology versus Face-to-Face Dermatology: An Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness from Eight Studies from Europe and the United States

(1) Background: The aim of this systematic review was to compare the cost-effectiveness of two follow-up methods (face-to-face and telemedicine) used in dermatology in the last ten years. (2) Methods: A search for articles that included economic analyses was conducted in August 2021 in the databases PubMed, Medline, Scielo and Scopus using the following keywords: "Cost-Benefit Analysis", "Dermatology", "Telemedicine", "Primary Health Care", as well as other search terms and following the PICOS eligibility criteria. (3) Results: Three clinical trials and five observational studies were analyzed, providing information for approximately 16,539 patients (including four cost-minimization or saving analyses, three cost-effectiveness analyses, and one cost-utility analysis) in Europe and the United States. They describe the follow-up procedures in each of the cases and measure and analyze the direct and indirect costs and effectiveness. All the articles indicate that teledermatology lowers costs and proves satisfactory to both patients and professionals. (4) Conclusions: Although it has been found that follow-up via teledermatology can be more efficient than traditional hospital follow-up, more work is needed to establish evaluation protocols and procedures that measure key variables more equally and demonstrate the quality of the evidence of said studies.

Teledermatology in the time of COVID-19

AIMS

The enormous spread of the novel Corona virus disease (COVID-19) represents a challenge to dermatological practice. Accumulating evidence has suggested a possible role of teledermatology in facing this challenge. In this article, we aimed to give a general overview of teledermatology in terms of models of practice, modes of delivery, advantages, limitations, ethical considerations and legislative challenges as well as discussing, using examples from literature, how dermatological practice can benefit from teledermatology during the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Teledermatology could be an accessible, accurate and cost-effective substitute for conventional face-to-face dermatological consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, teledermatology practice needs updated legislation and guidelines. More efforts should be done to encourage dermatologists, especially in underserved communities, to provide teledermatology services. Ethical issues and data security related to teledermatology have to be considered.

Telemedicine Use by Oculoplastic Surgeons During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Telemedicine use expanded dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic, including to surgical fields that had limited prior adoption of telehealth such as oculoplastic surgery. To assess telemedicine usage patterns, barriers to implementation, and satisfaction with telemedicine, we conducted a survey among members of the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ASOPRS). Methods: We performed a Web-based, anonymous survey of ASOPRS members from November to December 2020. Statistical analyses were performed by using Fisher's exact and Chi-squared tests. Results: We received 196 unique survey responses from 963 invited participants (20.5% response rate). Among the 192 ASOPRS members who participated, the majority (79%) reported currently using telemedicine. Very few of those currently using telemedicine (14%) had used telemedicine before March 15, 2020 and a significant proportion (36%) were unsure or did not plan to use telemedicine post-pandemic. Telemedicine use was more common among participants with fewer years in practice (p < 0.01) and those who were university- versus self-employed (p < 0.01). The most common barriers to telemedicine use were technological issues, reimbursement concerns, and a perceived lack of patient acceptance. Nearly half of the surgeons reported being satisfied with telemedicine (48%), and the majority reported perceived patient satisfaction with telemedicine (74%). Discussion: Telemedicine adoption increased significantly among oculoplastic surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, many current users reported that they were unsure or did not plan to use telemedicine post-pandemic. Conclusions: Further research is needed to design sustainable telemedicine programs to enhance patient access to oculoplastic specialty care in the long term.

Using Implementation Science to Understand Teledermatology Implementation Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-sectional Study (Preprint)

Background

Implementation science has been recognized for its potential to improve the integration of evidence-based practices into routine dermatologic care. The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in rapid teledermatology implementation worldwide. Although several studies have highlighted patient and care provider satisfaction with teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, less is known about the implementation process.

Objective

Our goal was to use validated tools from implementation science to develop a deeper understanding of the implementation of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our primary aims were to describe (1) the acceptability and feasibility of the implementation of teledermatology and (2) organizational readiness for the implementation of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also sought to offer an example of how implementation science can be used in dermatologic research.

Methods

An anonymous, web-based survey was distributed to Association of Professors of Dermatology members. It focused on (1) the acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of teledermatology and (2) organizational readiness for implementing teledermatology. It incorporated subscales from the Organizational Readiness to Change Assessment—a validated measure of organizational characteristics that predict implementation success.

Results

Of the 518 dermatologists emailed, 35 (7%) responded, and all implemented or scaled up teledermatology during the pandemic. Of the 11 care providers with the highest level of organizational readiness, 11 (100%) said that they plan to continue using teledermatology after the pandemic. Most respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they had sufficient training (24/35, 69%), financial resources (20/35, 57%), and facilities (20/35, 57%). However, of the 35 respondents, only 15 (43%) agreed or strongly agreed that they had adequate staffing support. Most respondents considered the most acceptable teledermatology modality to be synchronous audio and video visits with supplemental stored digital photos (23/35, 66%) and considered the least acceptable modality to be telephone visits without stored digital photos (6/35, 17%). Overall, most respondents thought that the implementation of synchronous audio and video with stored digital photos (31/35, 89%) and telephone visits with stored digital photos (31/35, 89%) were the most feasible. When asked about types of visits that were acceptable for synchronous video/audio visits (with stored digital photos), 18 of the 31 respondents (58%) said “new patients,” 27 (87%) said “existing patients,” 19 (61%) said “medication monitoring,” 3 (10%) said “total body skin exams,” and 22 (71%) said “lesions of concern.”

Conclusions

This study serves as an introduction to how implementation science research methods can be used to understand the implementation of novel technologies in dermatology. Our work builds upon prior studies by further characterizing the acceptability and feasibility of different teledermatology modalities. Our study may suggest initial insights on how dermatology practices and health care systems can support dermatologists in successfully incorporating teledermatology after the pandemic.