A Framework-Driven Systematic Review of the Barriers and Facilitators to Teledermatology Implementation.

Purpose of Review: Telemedicine use in dermatology, termed "teledermatology", offers a cost-effective model to improve healthcare efficiency and access. Only a minority of dermatology practices has integrated teledermatology into their practice prior to COVID-19. A thorough understanding of the barriers and facilitators may promote teledermatology adoption. Implementation science frameworks offer theoretically driven ways to assess factors affecting teledermatology implementation. This review uses a comprehensive implementation science framework to summarize barriers and facilitators of teledermatology implementation and appraises the quality of existing research. Recent Findings: Technological characteristics of teledermatology (e.g., user-friendliness) and factors within the outer setting (e.g., reimbursement and legal considerations) were the most commonly reported barriers. No existing studies use a comprehensive implementation framework to identify factors influencing teledermatology implementation. Many included studies have a risk of bias in at least two of the five study quality indices evaluated. Summary: This systematic review is the first study to summarize the existing teledermatology implementation literature into well-defined constructs from a comprehensive implementation science framework. Findings suggest future studies would benefit from the use of an implementation framework to reduce study bias, improve result comprehensiveness, facilitate comparisons across studies, and produce evidence-based resolutions to implementation barriers. Tools, resources, and recommendations to facilitate the use of an implementation framework in future studies are provided. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13671-020-00323-0.

Utilization of Asynchronous and Synchronous Teledermatology in a Large Health Care System During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Teledermatology offers an opportunity to continually deliver care during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Objective: To provide quantitative data about the use of teledermatology. Methods: Retrospective analysis of teledermatology consultations was performed from March 16 to May 1, 2020. The number/type of encounters, differences in diagnoses, and prescriptions between asynchronous and synchronous teledermatology visits were analyzed. Results: A total of 951 visits (36.2%) were asynchronous whereas 1,672 visits (63.8%) were synchronous. Only 131 (<5%) visits required an acute in-person follow-up. The diagnosis of acne was more frequent with asynchronous visits (p < 0.002, Bonferroni corrected). Antibiotics and nonretinoid acne medications were prescribed more with asynchronous visits, whereas immunomodulators and biologics were more commonly prescribed with synchronous visits (p < 0.02, Bonferroni corrected). Providers at our institution were split on preferred mode (54.2% synchronous, 45.8% asynchronous); however, synchronous visits were preferred for complex medical dermatology patients and return patients (p < 0.05). Limitations: This study is limited by being a single-center study. Conclusions: Asynchronous teledermatology was used more for acne management, whereas synchronous teledermatology was preferable to providers for complex medical dermatology. Postanalysis of the data collected led us to institute a hybridization of our asynchronous and synchronous teledermatology.