Literature DB >> 29261843

Using Network Oriented Research Assistant (NORA) Technology to Compare Digital Photographic With In-Person Assessment of Acne Vulgaris.

Hannah M Singer1, Timothy Almazan2, Noah Craft2,3, Consuelo V David2,3, Samantha Eells2, Crisel Erfe2, Cynthia Lazzaro2, Kathy Nguyen2,3, Katy Preciado2, Belinda Tan2,3, Vishal A Patel2,3.   

Abstract

Importance: Teledermatology has undergone exponential growth in the past 2 decades. Many technological innovations are becoming available without necessarily undergoing validation studies for specific dermatologic applications. Objective: To determine whether patient-taken photographs of acne using Network Oriented Research Assistant (NORA) result in similar lesion counts and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) findings compared with in-person examination findings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pilot reliability study enrolled consecutive patients with acne vulgaris from a single general dermatology practice in Los Angeles, California, who were able to use NORA on an iPhone 6 to take self-photographs. Patients were enrolled from January 1 through March 31, 2016. Each individual underwent in-person and digital evaluation of his or her acne by the same dermatologist. A period of at least 1 week separated the in-person and digital assessments of acne. Interventions: All participants were trained on how to use NORA on the iPhone 6 and take photographs of their face with the rear-facing camera. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reliability of patient-taken photographs with NORA for acne evaluation compared with in-person examination findings. Acne assessment measures included lesion count (total, inflammatory, noninflammatory, and cystic) and IGA for acne severity.
Results: A total of 69 patients (37 male [54%] and 32 female [46%]; mean [SD] age, 22.7 [7.7] years) enrolled in the study. The intraclass correlation coefficients of in-person and photograph-based acne evaluations indicated strong agreement. The intraclass correlation coefficient for total lesion count was 0.81; for the IGA, 0.75. Inflammatory lesion count, noninflammatory lesion count, and cyst count had intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.72, 0.72, and 0.82, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found agreement between acne evaluations performed in person and from self-photographs with NORA. As a reliable telehealth technology for acne, NORA can be used as a teledermatology platform for dermatology research and can increase access to dermatologic care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29261843      PMCID: PMC5839277          DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.5141

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Dermatol        ISSN: 2168-6068            Impact factor:   10.282


  9 in total

1.  Personal Burden of Isotretinoin Therapy and Willingness to Pay for Electronic Follow-up Visits.

Authors:  Westley S Mori; Neil Houston; Jacqueline F Moreau; Noel Prevost; Robin P Gehris; Laura Korb Ferris; Timothy J Patton
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 10.282

Review 2.  Epidemiology of acne vulgaris.

Authors:  K Bhate; H C Williams
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 9.302

3.  Mobile teledermatology helping patients control high-need acne: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  J Frühauf; S Kröck; F Quehenberger; D Kopera; R Fink-Puches; P Komericki; S Pucher; E Arzberger; R Hofmann-Wellenhof
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 6.166

Review 4.  A Comprehensive Critique and Review of Published Measures of Acne Severity.

Authors:  Tamara Agnew; Gareth Furber; Matthew Leach; Leonie Segal
Journal:  J Clin Aesthet Dermatol       Date:  2016-07-01

5.  A randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of online follow-up visits in the management of acne.

Authors:  Alice J Watson; Hagit Bergman; Christy M Williams; Joseph C Kvedar
Journal:  Arch Dermatol       Date:  2010-04

6.  Impact of live interactive teledermatology on diagnosis, disease management, and clinical outcomes.

Authors:  Sonia Lamel; Cindy J Chambers; Mondhipa Ratnarathorn; April W Armstrong
Journal:  Arch Dermatol       Date:  2012-01

7.  Effect of Teledermatology on Access to Dermatology Care Among Medicaid Enrollees.

Authors:  Lori Uscher-Pines; Rosalie Malsberger; Lane Burgette; Andrew Mulcahy; Ateev Mehrotra
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 10.282

8.  Clinical course outcomes for store and forward teledermatology versus conventional consultation: a randomized trial.

Authors:  John D Whited; Erin M Warshaw; Kush Kapur; Karen E Edison; Lizy Thottapurathu; Srihari Raju; Bethany Cook; Holly Engasser; Samantha Pullen; Thomas E Moritz; Santanu K Datta; Lucinda Marty; Neal A Foman; Pitiporn Suwattee; Dana S Ward; Domenic J Reda
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 6.184

Review 9.  Two Decades of Teledermatology: Current Status and Integration in National Healthcare Systems.

Authors:  E Tensen; J P van der Heijden; M W M Jaspers; L Witkamp
Journal:  Curr Dermatol Rep       Date:  2016-03-28
  9 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Teledermatology: current indications and considerations for future use.

Authors:  Jacob Beer; Edward Hadeler; Alejo Calume; Howard Gitlow; Keyvan Nouri
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 3.017

2.  Stakeholder Perspectives on Barriers and Facilitators for the Adoption of Virtual Clinical Trials: Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Romée Melanie Helena Coert; James Kenneth Timmis; André Boorsma; Wilrike J Pasman
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 5.428

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.