Integrating Digital Image Management Software for Improved Patient Care and Optimal Practice Management

Starr, Jon

doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2006.32169.x

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pre-treatment and post-treatment evaluation, documentation and skin care Recommendation 3: We recommend a clinical and digital photographic evaluation and documentation to be completed in conjunction with the laser/IPL procedures (GRADE 1C). 30,33,34 We recommend against avoidance of laser treatment in patients who are on or have recently stopped using oral isotretinoin (GRADE 2C). [35][36][37]…”

Section: Qualification Of Providers Of Laser And/or Ipl Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 Recent clinical studies showed that invasive acne scar treatments and laser procedures in patients on oral isotretinoin bring no additional risks and that the drug does not delay wound healing. [35][36][37] Disease-related measurements and reporting standards 30,34 Recommendation 4: We recommend the use of clinical (depending on the disorder treated) and photographic outcome measurements to evaluate the primary outcome of laser/IPL procedures (GRADE 1A).…”

Section: Medical History and Clinical Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Guidelines of care for vascular lasers and intense pulse light sources from the European Society for Laser Dermatology

Adamič¹,

Pavlović

Rubin

et al. 2015

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Lasers and non-coherent intense pulse light sources (IPLS) are based on the principle of selective photothermolysis and can be used for the treatment of many vascular skin lesions. A variety of lasers has been developed for the treatment of congenital and acquired vascular lesions which incorporate these concepts into their design. Although laser and light sources are very popular due to their non-invasive nature, caution should be considered by practitioners and patients to avoid permanent side-effects. The aim of these guidelines is to give evidence-based recommendations for the use of lasers and IPLS in the treatment of vascular lesions. Results Lasers and IPLS are very useful and sometimes the only available method to treat various vascular lesions. It is of a paramount importance that the type of laser or IPLS and their specific parameters are adapted to the indication but also that the treating physician is familiar with the device to be used. The crucial issue in treating vascular lesions is to recognize the immediate end-point after laser treatment. This is the single most important factor to ensure both the efficacy of the treatment and avoidance of serious side-effects. Methods Conflicts of interestNone declared. Funding sourceNone.Since the publication of previous European Society of Laser Dermatology (ESLD) guidelines in 2007, there have been significant advances in the field of laser treatment of common vascular lesions.1 These guidelines have been updated by the Consensus Panel under the auspices of the ESLD. Methodology, search strategy and recommendation formulation are described in Appendix II. A brief overview of vascular lasersStandard vascular lasers include pulsed dye lasers (585 and 595 nm), and KTP-lasers (532 nm), followed by longer wavelength lasers such as alexandrite lasers (755 nm), diode lasers (800-900 nm) and millisecond Nd:YAG lasers (1064 nm). New developments include a non-uniform pulse sequence or a dual-wavelength modality (combined dual wavelength 595 and 1064 nm-pulsed dye and Nd:YAG laser) and microsecond Nd: YAG lasers. [2][3][4][5][6] Even fractional photothermolysis has begun to be used for selected vascular lesions. Lasers' and intense pulse light sources (IPLS) effects are based on the principle of selective photothermolysis. In general, they deliver a precisely graded aliquot of energy to a defined area of the skin in a reproducible, standardized manner that almost always involves addition or evacuation of heat. The greatestThe first two authors have contributed equally to the manuscript.

show abstract

Section: Qualification Of Providers Of Laser And/or Ipl Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Medical History and Clinical Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines of care for vascular lasers and intense pulse light sources from the European Society for Laser Dermatology

Adamič¹,

Pavlović

Rubin

et al. 2015

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Psychiatrists also worry that patients may adjust what they discuss during psychiatric visits based on the perceived privacy of the record [41]. Ophthalmology and dermatology both have high patient volume, require the integration of specialized images and hand written drawings, and typically include both a busy outpatient practice and surgical procedures [13,19,22,44]. Pediatricians have many specific information needs that differ from those of physicians who care for adults, including immunization management, documentation of growth, and weight and age based dosing [43].…”

Section: Potential Explanations For Ehr Adoption Variability Among Phmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physician Specialty and Variations in Adoption of Electronic Health Records

Grinspan

Banerjee²,

Kaushal³

et al. 2013

Appl Clin Inform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryObjective: Efforts to promote adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) have focused on primary care physicians, who are now expected to exchange data electronically with other providers, including specialists. However, the variation of EHR adoption among specialists is underexplored. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study to determine the association between physician specialty and the prevalence of EHR adoption, and a retrospective serial cross-sectional study to determine the association of physician specialty and the rate of EHR adoption over time. We used the 2005-2009 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. We considered fourteen specialties, and four definitions of EHR adoption (any EHR, basic EHR, full EHR, and a novel definition of EHR sophistication). We used multivariable logistic regression, and adjusted for several covariates (geography, practice characteristics, revenue characteristics, physician degree). Results: Physician specialty was significantly associated with EHR adoption, regardless of the EHR definition, after adjusting for covariates. Psychiatrists, dermatologists, pediatricians, ophthalmologists, and general surgeons were significantly less likely to adopt EHRs, compared to the reference group of family medicine / general practitioners. After adjustment for covariates, these specialties were 44 -94% less likely to adopt EHRs than the reference group. EHR adoption increased in all specialties, by approximately 40% per year. The rate of EHR adoption over time did not significantly vary by specialty. Conclusions: Although EHR adoption is increasing in all specialties, adoption varies widely by specialty. In order to insure each individual's network of providers can electronically share data, widespread adoption of EHRs is needed across all specialties. BackgroundThe United States (U.S.) federal government has committed more than $20 billion to encourage physicians to adopt electronic health records (EHRs) [8]. Driving these incentives is the expectation that large scale appropriate use of EHRs will facilitate coordination of care, improve health care quality, and lower national health care costs [5,9]. To receive incentive payments, physicians must purchase and install a certified EHR, then demonstrate "meaningful use" by meeting specific criteria. Example criteria include use of software to reduce medical errors (i.e. electronic prescribing), collection of data relevant for clinical quality measurement (i.e. smoking status), and maintenance of patient summaries to facilitate sharing of data among providers (i.e. electronic problem lists and medication lists) [10].Several previous initiatives, such as national recognition programs for the Patient-Centered Medical Home, have encouraged adoption of EHRs among primary care physicians [17]. Many of the most common quality measures, including those for EHRs, also focus on primary care [24]. However, there is an increasing effort to facilitate electronic exchange of clinical data across providers caring for commo...

show abstract

“…11 The ability to track disease progression and search image databases by patient age, sex, location of image, disease process, procedure, and date would be particularly helpful. [19][20][21][22] While this is currently the rare exception, an EMR system is maximally effective when the entire health care system shares information. Optimally, new laboratory values, radiology reports, dermatopathology reports, and consultations from other physicians are flagged for daily review and then automatically inserted into the EHR.…”

Section: Effect On Quality Of Carementioning

confidence: 99%

The Electronic Medical Record in Dermatology

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating Digital Image Management Software for Improved Patient Care and Optimal Practice Management

Abstract: A variety of computer applications are available to optimize the use of digital images in the dermatologic practice.

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

Guidelines of care for vascular lasers and intense pulse light sources from the European Society for Laser Dermatology

Guidelines of care for vascular lasers and intense pulse light sources from the European Society for Laser Dermatology

Physician Specialty and Variations in Adoption of Electronic Health Records

The Electronic Medical Record in Dermatology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About