Search

The application of teledermatology for evaluating acne patients has yielded comparable therapeutic outcomes with traditional face-to-face evaluation, but follow-up compliance between these modalities is not well-studied. Our objective is to compare the rate and duration of follow-up between acne patients initially evaluated by teledermatology versus in-person outpatient consultation. Electronic medical review of acne patients, 18-35 years-old seen via teledermatology and face-to-face evaluation at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between 2010-2018 was performed. Teledermatology patients were less likely to follow-up in the first 90 days (13.0% versus 31.0%, P

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether physician-to-physician outpatient asynchronous store-and-forward teledermatology can be a portal for patient access to consultative dermatologic care and decrease primary care physician referrals to dermatology. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. METHODS: Reviewed outpatient teledermatology consults completed within a shared Epic electronic health record at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Health System between August 4, 2013, and December 19, 2019. Study data were reviewed for consult response time and triage percentage. Patient and physician experiences were collected by satisfaction surveys. RESULTS: This study reviewed 1581 teledermatology consults that originated from UPMC primary care provider (PCP) appointments. The average response time for a completed consult was 1 hour, 13 minutes for same-day consult submissions. The majority of consults, 63%, were completed online, whereas only 37% of patients were recommended for an in-person referral visit to the dermatology clinic. Surveyed patients (81%) and PCPs (90%) responded positively to their teledermatology experience. CONCLUSIONS: Physician-to-physician outpatient asynchronous teledermatology consults can provide a model for rapid consultation and decreased primary care referral to dermatology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.

Background: Currently, the number of inpatient dermatology providers cannot meet the overall burden of inpatient skin disease in the United States. Introduction: We seek to determine whether inpatient eDermatology can meet the need for inpatient skin disease in hospitals without access to a dermatology hospitalist. Methods: This retrospective cohort study reviewed inpatient eDermatology consults at the University of Pittsburgh eDermatology Consult Service between July 1, 2014 and June 30, 2018. This included a diverse group of 1,320 patients admitted to 10 different community hospitals. Study data were reviewed for demographics, diagnostic impressions, time to discharge, and diagnostic discordance between referring and consultant physicians. Results: Forty percent of inpatient eDermatology consults were admitted with a primary dermatologic diagnosis. Referring diagnosis most commonly was rash not otherwise specified. eDermatology consulting impressions, conversely, were specific and varied. Ninety-one percent of patients received a consultant impression by the end of day, or within 8 hours. Overall, 89.3% of patients with a referring diagnosis of "cellulitis" were given a different diagnosis by the consultant. Discussion: Although this study lacked concordance data to compare the Inpatient eDermatologist with a live Inpatient Dermatologist, overall, eDermatology consultants were able to provide rapid consult recommendations that aided patient management. Conclusions: Inpatient eDermatology appears to be an effective medium to provide dermatologic care to patients at hospitals without a dermatology presence. This delivery of health care can help prevent misdiagnosis, unnecessary costs, and inappropriate systemic therapies.