As a product of electronic health, teledermatology is a cost-effective means of improving access to care, facilitating specialist consultations, and supporting patient self-management. Even so, use of traditional teledermatology services is limited by infrastructure and costs in the form of digital cameras, computers, and Internet access.
Methods:
Considering the significant improvement in smartphone camera resolution and the rapidly increasing number of physicians using smartphones, we explored the use of smartphones as reliable, effective clinical tools in store-and-forward teledermatology. We describe the technical specifications of modern smartphone cameras, the widespread use of smartphones by physicians, and the advantages of smartphones over traditional camera and Internet teledermatology, and we propose recommendations as to how mobile teledermatology may be more effectively used in modern dermatologic practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FarshidiDCraftNOchoaMT. Mobile teledermatology: As doctors and patients are increasingly mobile, technology keeps us connected. Skinmed2011;9:231–8.
2.
KanthrajGR. Teledermatology: Its role in dermatosurgery. J Cutan Aesthet Surg2008;1:68–74, doi:10.4103/0974-2077.44162.
3.
LyonCCHarrisonPV. Digital imaging and teledermatology: Educational and diagnostic applications of a portable digital imaging system for the trainee dermatologist. Clin Exp Dermatol1997;22:163–5, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.1997.tb01052.x.
4.
ChungPYuTScheinfeldN. Using cellphones for teledermatology, a preliminary study. Dermatol Online J2007;13:2.
5.
FerrandizLRuiz-de-CasasAMartin-GutierrezFJ. Effect of teledermatology on the prognosis of patients with cutaneous melanoma. Arch Dermatol2012;148:1025–8, doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2012.778.
6.
LamelSAHaldemanKMElyH. Application of mobile teledermatology for skin cancer screening. J Am Acad Dermatol2012;67:576–81, doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2011.11.957.
7.
van der HeijdenJPde KeizerNFBosJD. Teledermatology applied following patient selection by general practitioners in daily practice improves efficiency and quality of care at lower cost. Br J Dermatol2011;165:1058–65, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10509.x.
TranKAyadMWeinbergJ. Mobile teledermatology in the developing world: Implications of a feasibility study on 30 Egyptian patients with common skin diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol2011;64:302–9, doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2010.01.010.
10.
KroemerSFruhaufJCampbellTM. Mobile teledermatology for skin tumour screening: Diagnostic accuracy of clinical and dermoscopic image tele-evaluation using cellular phones. Br J Dermatol2011;164:973–9, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10208.x.
11.
MassoneCBrunassoAMCampbellTM. Mobile teledermoscopy—melanoma diagnosis by one click?Semin Cutan Med Surg2009;28:203–5, doi:10.1016/j.sder.2009.06.002.
12.
HarrisonPVKirbyBDickinsonY. Teledermatology—high technology or not?J Telemed Telecare1998;4Suppl 1:31–2, doi:10.1258/1357633981931344.
13.
BorveAHolstAGente-LidholmA. Use of the mobile phone multimedia messaging service for teledermatology. J Telemed Telecare2012;18:292–6, doi:10.1258/jtt.2012.120206.
14.
SeidenariSPellacaniGRighiE. Is JPEG compression of videomicroscopic images compatible with telediagnosis? Comparison between diagnostic performance and pattern recognition on uncompressed TIFF images and JPEG compressed ones. Telemed J E Health2004;10:294–303, doi:10.1089/tmj.2004.10.294.
15.
PutzerGJParkY. Are physicians likely to adopt emerging mobile technologies? Attitudes and innovation factors affecting smartphone use in the southeastern United States. Perspect Health Inf Manag2012;9:1b.
16.
Katz-SidlowRJLudwigAMillerS. Smartphone use during inpatient attending rounds: Prevalence, patterns and potential for distraction. J Hosp Med2012;7:595–9, doi:10.1002/jhm.1950.
17.
ShethNKaneYI. Smart-phone makers call the doctor. Wall Street Journal2009 Oct 8; Health Industry.
SunejaTSmithEDChenGJ. Waiting times to see a dermatologist are perceived as too long by dermatologists: Implications for the dermatology workforce. Arch Dermatol2001;137:1303–7.
20.
ArmstrongAWDorerDJLugnNE. Economic evaluation of interactive teledermatology compared with conventional care. Telemed J E Health2007;13:91–9, doi:10.1089/tmj.2006.0035.
21.
NorrisAC. Technology of telemedicine systems. Essentials of telemedicine and telecare. Chichester UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2002. p. 39–59.
22.
ArmstrongAWKwongMWChaseEP. Teledermatology operational considerations, challenges, and benefits: The referring providers' perspective. Telemed J E Health2012;18:580–4, doi:10.1089/tmj.2011.0014.
23.
ArmstrongAWKwongMWLedoL. Practice models and challenges in teledermatology: A study of collective experiences from teledermatologists. PLoS One2011;6:e28687, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0028687.
24.
LoaneMAGoreHECorbettR. Effect of camera performance on diagnostic accuracy: Preliminary results from the Northern Ireland arms of the UK Multicentre Teledermatology Trial. J Telemed Telecare1997;3:83–8, doi:10.1258/1357633971930913.
