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 ......
Review |

Cost-effectiveness of Store-and-Forward Teledermatology A Systematic Review

Centaine Snoswell, BPharm, MPH1; Anna Finnane, PhD2,3; Monika Janda, PhD4,5; H. Peter Soyer, MD3,5,6; Jennifer A. Whitty, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1School of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
2Centre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, School of Medicine, Brisbane, Australia
3Dermatology Research Centre, The University of Queensland, School of Medicine, Translational Research Centre, Brisbane, Australia
4Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
5Centre of Research Excellence for the Study of Naevi, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
6Department of Dermatology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(6):702-708. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.0525.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  Teledermatology is a topical clinical approach being tested in Australia and elsewhere. With most dermatologists residing in metropolitan areas, teledermatology provides an apparent low-cost and convenient means of access for individuals living outside these areas. It is important that any proposed new addition to a health care system is assessed on the grounds of economic cost and effectiveness.

Objective  To summarize and evaluate the current economic evidence comparing store-and-forward teledermatology (S&FTD) with conventional face-to-face care.

Evidence Review  Search terms with appropriate amendments were used to identify S&FTD articles that included economic analysis. Six databases were searched, and title, abstract and full-text reviews were conducted by 2 researchers. References of all unique returned articles were searched by hand. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to evaluate quality of the included articles.

Findings  Eleven articles were selected for inclusion, including 1 cost analysis, 4 cost-minimization analyses, 4 cost-effectiveness analyses, and 2 cost-utility analyses. CHEERS scores ranged from 7 to 21 out of a possible 24 points, with a median score of 17.

Conclusions and Relevance  Current evidence is sparse but suggests that S&FTD can be cost-effective. It appears to be cost-effective when used as a triage mechanism to reduce face-to-face appointment requirements. The cost-effectiveness of S&FTD increases when patients are required to travel farther distances to access dermatology services. Further economic research is required for the emerging S&FTD, which uses dermoscopes in combination with smartphone applications, as well as regarding the possibility and consequences of patients self-capturing and transmitting images.

Figures in this Article

Figures

Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure.
Article Selection Process and Exclusion Criteria

Modeled according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol.

Graphic Jump Location

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also 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.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
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.

Multimedia

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

738 Views
0 Citations
×

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

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

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
What are the Results?

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed
How Much Does Allowing for Uncertainty Change the Results?

brightcove.createExperiences();