Teledermatology: an intraobserver diagnostic correlation study, Part II.

This is part II of an intraobserver diagnostic correlation study comparing teledermatology with traditional face-to-face evaluation. Part I discussed the methodology and diagnostic correlation results between teledermatology and in-person consultation (Cutis. 2003;71:399-403). This second part reports the diagnostic certainty level between the 2 groups, which are shown to be significantly different (teledermatology, 7/10; in-person, 9/10). This difference held true in every category of skin condition evaluated (P < or = .0065). Unlike other studies, we found that teledermatologists recommended biopsies 10% more frequently than clinic-based evaluators. We discuss the reasons for the lower diagnostic certainty level of teledermatologists, as well as the limitations of this study. Despite the limitations, we conclude that teledermatology appears to be an effective method of delivering dermatologic care in the appropriate setting.

Teledermatology: an intraobserver diagnostic correlation study, part I.

Many studies have been published recently on the effectiveness of teledermatology as a diagnostic tool; however, much of the data comes from live 2-way video teleconferencing consultations and very little comes from more readily available "store and forward" consultations. Moreover, most published studies compare the diagnoses of 2 different dermatologists (interobserver comparison). Given the lack of data on baseline interdermatologist diagnostic variability, the interpretation of currently available diagnostic correlation data is somewhat difficult. The objective of this study is to measure the degree of diagnostic concordance between a dermatologist seeing a patient via a teledermatology consult system and the same dermatologist seeing the same patient face-to-face in a dermatology clinic at a tertiary medical center. A random sample of 404 patients was selected from patients who had routine appointments at our dermatology clinic.