Current Economic Evidence for Teledermoscopy

The Role of Dermoscopy in Provider-to-Provider Store-and-Forward Dermatology eConsults: A Scoping Review of the Recent Literature

Purpose of Review

This scoping review maps recent literature on dermatology provider-to-provider asynchronous store-and-forward (SAF) electronic consult (eConsult) platforms with dermoscopy. It offers a descriptive overview, highlighting benefits and challenges.

Recent Findings

Incorporating dermoscopy into SAF eConsults improves diagnostic accuracy for benign and malignant skin neoplasms. Diagnostic and treatment concordance with traditional face-to-face (FTF) visits is high. SAF eConsults with dermoscopy enhance access to dermatological care by improving triage and reducing wait times for FTF visits. Pediatric patients benefit with improved evaluation of melanocytic and vascular growths. eConsult platforms with dermoscopy serve as a telementoring opportunity for clinicians interested in improving their dermoscopy skills.

Summary

Adding dermoscopy to SAF eConsults is valuable and results in improved diagnostic accuracy and reduced need for FTF visits. Implementation barriers can be overcome through collaboration between primary care and dermatology. Dermoscopy in SAF eConsults has significant potential for managing skin conditions and reducing the burden caused by unnecessary FTF visit and biopsies.

Eleven years of teledermoscopy in the Netherlands: A retrospective quality and performance analysis of 18,738 consultations

INTRODUCTION

Teledermoscopy supports and enhances the early detection of skin lesions by general practitioners in primary practice through remote consultation with dermatologists. Teledermoscopy has been a regular health service in Dutch primary care since February 2009. Teledermoscopy quality and performance outcomes on Dutch general practitioner primary care 11 years after its implementation were assessed.

METHODS

Dutch primary care teledermoscopy consultation data was retrospectively analysed on timestamps and responses on non-mandatory evaluation questions posed to the general practitioner and teledermatologist during the teledermoscopy consultation process. Anonymized data (February 2009-February 2020) was extracted from a Dutch teledermoscopy service database. The timestamps and evaluation questions data were subject to the teledermoscopy quality and performance outcomes. A limited cost evaluation was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 18,738 teledermoscopy consultations were sent by 1341 general practitioners (February 2009-February 2020). For 3908 (31.9%) teledermoscopy consultations, the general practitioner requested second opinion advice which led to 712 (18.2%) extra teledermoscopy referrals of patients who would not have been referred without teledermoscopy, including skin cancer teledermoscopy diagnoses. The general practitioner followed the teledermatologists' advice on patient referral for 8813 (88.5%) patients, reported 97.3% of the teledermoscopy consultations as helpful and 95.1% as instructive, referred 68.0% less patients with teledermoscopy availability, referred overall 59.4% less patients, and needed 5.4 minutes (median) for sending a teledermoscopy consultation. Teledermatologist's median answer and response time was 2 minutes and 2.4 hours, respectively. The estimated cost reduction was €144.18 ($164.65) (50.2%) per teledermoscopy patient.

DISCUSSION

Teledermoscopy is a useful service in general practitioner practice for requesting dermatologist advice in primary care settings to support the detection of skin lesion at an early stage and at lower costs. Teledermoscopy could also decrease the burden of secondary dermatology care since general practitioners reported that they did not refer the majority of patients to a dermatologist after the teledermoscopy consultation compared to their initial referral decision. General practitioners reported the teledermoscopy system as helpful and instructive which could contribute to enhancement of their dermatological knowledge.

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.

Consumer Preference and Willingness to Pay for Direct-to-Consumer Mobile Teledermoscopy Services in Australia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate consumer preference and willingness to pay for mobile teledermoscopy services in Australia.

METHODS

Consumers who were taking part in a randomised controlled trial comparing mobile teledermoscopy and skin self-examination were asked to complete a survey which incorporated a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a contingent valuation question. Responses were used to determine their willingness to pay for mobile teledermoscopy services in Australia and their overall service preferences.

RESULTS

The 199 consumers who responded were 71% female and had a mean age of 42 years (range, 18-73). The DCE results showed that consumers prefer a trained medical professional to be involved in their skin cancer screening. Consumers were willing to pay AUD 41 to change from a general practitioner reviewing their lesions in-person to having a dermatologist reviewing the teledermoscopy images. Additionally, they were willing to pay for services that had shorter waiting times, that reduced the time away from their usual activities, and that have higher accuracy and lower likelihood of unnecessary excision of a skin lesion. When asked directly about their willingness to pay for a teledermoscopy service using a contingent valuation question, the majority (73%) of consumers selected the lowest two value brackets of AUD 1-20 or AUD 21-40.

CONCLUSION

Consumers are willing to pay out of pocket to access services with attributes such as a dermatologist review, improved accuracy, and fewer excisions.