Most teledermatology evaluation studies are classified as feasibility studies (phase II). The number of phase III and IV studies remains low through the years. Compared with other specialties in telemedicine (i.e. telesurgery, telepaediatrics), teledermatology seems to be a mature application. However, more evaluation studies with a focus on clinical outcomes such as preventable referrals or time to recovery are needed to prove that teledermatology indeed is a promising and cost-saving technology.

BackgroundAlthough store-and-forward teledermatology is increasingly becoming popular, evidence on its effects on efficiency and costs is lacking. The aim of this study, performed in addition to a clustered randomised trial, was to investigate to what extent and under which conditions store-and-forward teledermatology can reduce costs from a societal perspective.MethodsA cost minimisation study design (a model based approach) was applied to compare teledermatology and conventional process costs per dermatology patient care episode. Regarding the societal perspective, total mean costs of investment, general practitioner, dermatologists, out-of-pocket expenses and employer costs were calculated. Uncertainty analysis was performed using Monte Carlo simulation with 31 distributions in the used cost model. Scenario analysis was performed using one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses with the following variables: the patient travel distance to physician and dermatologist, the duration of teleconsultation activities, and the proportion of preventable consultations.ResultsTotal mean costs of teledermatology process were €387 (95%CI, 281 to 502.5), while the total mean costs of conventional process costs were €354.0 (95%CI, 228.0 to 484.0). The total mean difference between the processes was €32.5 (95%CI, -29.0 to 74.7). Savings by teledermatology can be achieved if the distance to a dermatologist is larger (> = 75 km) or when more consultations (> = 37%) can be prevented due to teledermatology.ConclusionsTeledermatology, when applied to all dermatology referrals, has a probability of 0.11 of being cost saving to society.In order to achieve cost savings by teledermatology, teledermatology should be applied in only those cases with a reasonable probability that a live consultation can be prevented.Trail RegistrationThis study is performed partially based on PERFECT D Trial (Current Controlled Trials No.ISRCTN57478950).

To determine whether teledermatologic consultations can reduce referrals to a dermatologist by general practitioners (GPs).Design: Multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial. Setting and Participants:We recruited 85 GPs from 35 general practices in 2 regions in the Netherlands (Almere and Zeist); 5 dermatologists from 2 nonacademic hospitals were also included in the study. Interventions:The GPs randomized to the intervention used a teledermatologic consultation system to confer with a dermatologist, whereas those in the control group referred their patients according to usual practice. All patients, regardless of their condition, were seen in the office by a dermatologist after approximately 1 month.Outcome Measures: The main outcome measure was the proportion of office visits prevented by teledermatologic consultation, as determined by dermatologists at approxi-matelythe1-monthofficevisit.Thesecondaryoutcomemeasure was patient satisfaction, measured using the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire III developed by Ware et al. Results:The 85 study GPs enrolled 631 patients (46 intervention GPs, 327 patients; 39 control GPs, 304 patients). The 5 dermatologists considered a consultation preventable for 39.0% of patients who received teledermatologic consultation and 18.3% of 169 control patients, a difference of 20.7% (95% confidence interval, 8.5%-32.9%). At the 1-month dermatologist visit, 20.0% of patients who received teledermatologic consultation had recovered compared with 4.1% of control patients. No significant differences in patient satisfaction were found between groups.Conclusions: Teledermatologic consultation offers the promise of reducing referrals to a dermatologist by 20.7%. Providing teledermatologic consultation by GPs with more extended knowledge of dermatology may further reduce the need for dermatologist referrals.

No abstract