BACKGROUND:Teledermoscopy involves the use of dermoscopic images for remote consultation and decision-making in skin cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: We sought to analyze the potential benefits gained from the addition of dermoscopic images to an internet-based skin cancer screening system. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial assessed the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of clinical teleconsultations (CTC) and clinical with dermoscopic teleconsultations. RESULTS:A total of 454 patients were enrolled in the trial (nCTC = 226, nclinical with dermoscopic teleconsultation = 228). Teledermoscopy improved sensitivity and specificity (92.86% and 96.24%, respectively) compared with CTC (86.57% and 72.33%, respectively). Correct decisions were made in 94.30% of patients through clinical with dermoscopic teleconsultations and in 79.20% in CTC (P < .001). The only variable associated with an increased likelihood of correct diagnosis was management using teledermoscopy (odds ratio 4.04; 95% confidence interval 2.02-8.09; P < .0001). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed teledermoscopy as the dominant strategy, with a lower cost-effectiveness ratio (65.13 vs 80.84). LIMITATIONS: Potentially, a limitation is the establishment of an experienced dermatologist as the gold standard for the in-person evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dermoscopic images significantly improves the results of an internet-based skin cancer screening system, compared with screening systems based on clinical images alone.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Teledermoscopy involves the use of dermoscopic images for remote consultation and decision-making in skin cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: We sought to analyze the potential benefits gained from the addition of dermoscopic images to an internet-based skin cancer screening system. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial assessed the diagnostic performance and cost-effectiveness of clinical teleconsultations (CTC) and clinical with dermoscopic teleconsultations. RESULTS: A total of 454 patients were enrolled in the trial (nCTC = 226, nclinical with dermoscopic teleconsultation = 228). Teledermoscopy improved sensitivity and specificity (92.86% and 96.24%, respectively) compared with CTC (86.57% and 72.33%, respectively). Correct decisions were made in 94.30% of patients through clinical with dermoscopic teleconsultations and in 79.20% in CTC (P < .001). The only variable associated with an increased likelihood of correct diagnosis was management using teledermoscopy (odds ratio 4.04; 95% confidence interval 2.02-8.09; P < .0001). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed teledermoscopy as the dominant strategy, with a lower cost-effectiveness ratio (65.13 vs 80.84). LIMITATIONS: Potentially, a limitation is the establishment of an experienced dermatologist as the gold standard for the in-person evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dermoscopic images significantly improves the results of an internet-based skin cancer screening system, compared with screening systems based on clinical images alone.
Authors: Centaine L Snoswell; Liam J Caffery; Jennifer A Whitty; H Peter Soyer; Louisa G Gordon Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: O T Jones; L C Jurascheck; M A van Melle; S Hickman; N P Burrows; P N Hall; J Emery; F M Walter Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley; Ana Rita J Maria; Ignacio Ricci-Cabello; Gemma Villanueva; Marita S Fønhus; Claire Glenton; Simon Lewin; Nicholas Henschke; Brian S Buckley; Garrett L Mehl; Tigest Tamrat; Sasha Shepperd Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-08-18