Does the Diagnostic Accuracy and Rates of Face-to-Face Visits Occurring Shortly after an Asynchronized Teledermatology Consultation Justify Its Implementation? An 18-Month Cohort Study

Abstract

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> In 2019, Maccabi Health Services (MHS) rolled out the store-and-forward “Dermadetect” teledermatology consultation (TC) application. Study goal was to analyze MHS records of TCs (August 2019–February 2021) for the rate and reasons for face-to-face consultations (FTFC) occurring shortly after a TC with emphasis on FTFCs resulting in a different diagnosis for the same indication. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> The records of FTFCs held up shortly after TCs were reviewed and classified into cases marked as unsuited for teledermatology, cases in which the indication differed, and cases with the same indication, which were analyzed for concordance of diagnoses. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Dermadetect was used by 12,815 MHS beneficiaries. In 30% of cases, following FTFC occurred within the subsequent 5 months, and 901 of them occurred in the subsequent 2 weeks and were analyzed. Thirty percent were not suited for teledermatology, 15% were held for a different indication, and 55% occurred for the same indication. The diagnosis concordance between the TC and recurrent FTFC for the same indication was 97.4%, with full concordance at 68.1% and partial concordance at 29.3%. Overall, 13 patients (1.4%) of the 901 patients using the application only once had a subsequent FTFC within 2 weeks and received a different diagnosis than the one given in the TC. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> When considering the implementation of store-and-forward TC’s, a 30% rate of following FTFC’s during the next 5 months should be considered when planning the reimbursement model. Diagnosis discordance may be disregarded due to its low rates.