0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Research Letters |

Why Some Dermatologists Do Not Practice Store-and-Forward Teledermatology FREE

April W. Armstrong, MD, MPH; Mei W. Kwong, JD; Elizabeth P. Chase, MD; Lynda Ledo, BS; Thomas S. Nesbitt, MD, MPH; Sandra Louise Shewry, MPH, MSW
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Dermatology (Drs Armstrong and Chase and Ms Ledo) and Vice Chancellor/Dean's Office (Dr Nesbitt), University of California, Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, California; Center for Connected Health Policy, Sacramento (Mss Kwong and Shewry).


Arch Dermatol. 2012;148(5):649-650. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.42.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Numerous studies comparing store-and-forward (S&F) teledermatology with conventional, face-to-face care have shown several advantages of S&F teledermatology, including improved patient access, comparable diagnostic accuracy, cost-effective care, and remote medical education.13 However, despite these reported benefits of teledermatology in the medical literature, the pace of adoption for S&F teledermatology in the United States has not been as rapid as it might be.

Perception of teledermatology by dermatologists who do not practice it is unknown in the United States. This is an important area of investigation because the findings could help identify areas of opportunity to increase teledermatology adoption in the dermatology community at large.

This study was approved by the institutional review board at the University of California Davis. The Center for Connected Health Policy provided the research team with a list of board-certified dermatologists. Using a multi-pronged approach, we sought to identify all California dermatologists not practicing teledermatology. From September 2010 to March 2011, we randomly surveyed these dermatologists to ask why they did not practice teledermatology.

Of the 120 questionnaires distributed, 26 (21.6%) were returned. The responding dermatologists reported their level of agreement with reasons for not practicing teledermatology by ranking them 1 (disagree strongly) through 6 (agree strongly) (Figure 1).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Reasons for not practicing teledermatology. Bubble indicates median rank; error bars, interquartile range.

The dermatologists cited the following 2 top reasons for not practicing S&F teledermatology: (1) lack of understanding of teledermatology reimbursement (median rank, 6.0; interquartile range [IQR], 5.0-6.0); and (2) significantly increased medical-legal risk that teledermatology might impose on their practice, compared with in-person treatment (median rank, 6.0; IQR, 5.0-6.0). The dermatologists reported moderate agreement with the following reasons for not practicing teledermatology: lack of understanding of setup requirements (median rank, 5.0; IQR, 3.3-6.0) and potentially lower teledermatology reimbursements (median rank, 5.5; IQR, 4.0-6.0). Lack of in-person interaction was the reason least cited by the respondents for not practicing teledermatology.

In addition to inquiring into reasons why dermatologists did not practice teledermatology, we asked the dermatologists to assess incentives for them to practice teledermatology. The level of importance was evaluated on a Likert scale from 1 (very unimportant) through 6 (very important) (Figure 2).

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Importance of incentives. Bubble indicates median rank; error bars, interquartile range.

The respondents reported the following 4 factors to be very important incentives for them to practice teledermatology: (1) being trained in reimbursement; (2) receiving reimbursement similar to that received for in-person treatment; (3) being informed about the legal risks involved in teledermatology practices; (4) being assured that the medical-legal risks are not greater for teledermatology than they are for in-person visits.

To our knowledge, this is the first survey to investigate dermatologists' stated reasons for not practicing teledermatology and potential incentives for encouraging future participation. By studying these dermatologists, we identified barriers in California to providing teledermatology services and incentives to galvanize the dermatology workforce to participate in teledermatology. Adoption of new health policies that address the perceived barriers to teledermatology and provide incentives for provider participation will be important for sustainability of teledermatology practices.

Correspondence: Dr Armstrong, Department of Dermatology, University of California Davis Health System, 3301 C St, Ste 1400, Sacramento, CA 95816 (aprilarmstrong@post.harvard.edu).

Accepted for Publication: December 20, 2011.

Author Contributions: All authors had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: Armstrong, Kwong, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Acquisition of data: Armstrong, Ledo, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Analysis and interpretation of data: Armstrong, Chase, Ledo, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Drafting of the manuscript: Armstrong and Chase. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Armstrong, Kwong, Chase, Ledo, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Statistical analysis: Armstrong, Chase, Ledo, and Nesbitt. Obtained funding: Armstrong, Kwong, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Administrative, technical, and material support: Armstrong, Kwong, Nesbitt, and Shewry. Study supervision: Armstrong.

Financial Disclosure: None reported.

Funding/Support: This study was funded by California HealthCare Foundation and Center for Connected Health Policy.

Additional Contributions: We acknowledge the following physicians for their participation in the project: Jeffrey Benabio, MD, Melvin Chiu, MD, William J. Coffey, MD, Kelly Cordoro, MD, Noah Craft, MD, Eileen Crowley, MD, Haines Ely, MD, Ilona Frieden, MD, Eric Fromer, MD, Marc Goldyne, MD, Michael Kolodney, MD, Ivy Lee, MD, Toby Maurer, MD, Dennis Oh, MD, Abel Torres, MD, and David Wong MD. We thank Marc Goldyne, MD, for his valuable insights and guidance regarding the design of this project and Amber Harrison for her administrative support of this project.

Whited JD. Teledermatology research review.  Int J Dermatol. 2006;45(3):220-229
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Eminović N, de Keizer NF, Bindels PJ, Hasman A. Maturity of teledermatology evaluation research: a systematic literature review.  Br J Dermatol. 2007;156(3):412-419
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pathipati AS, Lee L, Armstrong AW. Health-care delivery methods in teledermatology: consultative, triage and direct-care models.  J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(4):214-216
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 1. Reasons for not practicing teledermatology. Bubble indicates median rank; error bars, interquartile range.

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Graphic Jump Location

Figure 2. Importance of incentives. Bubble indicates median rank; error bars, interquartile range.

Tables

References

Whited JD. Teledermatology research review.  Int J Dermatol. 2006;45(3):220-229
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Eminović N, de Keizer NF, Bindels PJ, Hasman A. Maturity of teledermatology evaluation research: a systematic literature review.  Br J Dermatol. 2007;156(3):412-419
PubMed   |  Link to Article
Pathipati AS, Lee L, Armstrong AW. Health-care delivery methods in teledermatology: consultative, triage and direct-care models.  J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(4):214-216
PubMed   |  Link to Article

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 3

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Briefing notes on maritime teledermatology. Int Marit Health 2014;65(2):61-4.
Mobile teledermatology helping patients control high-need acne: a randomized controlled trial. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Published online Sep 26, 2014.;