Utility of Store and Forward Teledermatology for Skin Patch Test Readings

Three-part scoring system (tripartite) for teledermatology versus International Contact Dermatitis Research Group criteria to interpret patch test readings: A comparative, observational study

Background The International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) grading is the gold standard and is used to interpret patch test results in allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). The ICDRG readings include a combination of visual and palpation findings. Digital photography limits palpation. An alternative scoring system exists to analyse 2D images and interpret patch test readings in teledermatology (TD). Aim To compare tri-partite scoring system (TPSS) (TD) with ICDRG (face-to-face) and to assess the feasibility of TPSS by TD. Methods In this observational study, two investigators each scored the patch test readings for 78 patients at the 48th h, 96th h and on the 7th day. Results The TPSS has a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 93.34%, positive predictive value of 91.67% and negative predictive value of 100%. At a confidence interval of 95%, Cohen's kappa (0.90) indicated excellent agreement between both investigators. The concordance between both scoring systems was at 93.2% for agreement and 6.82% for disagreement. Polysensitisation (6 patients with 16 allergens) was detected equally in both methods. Limitation A single centre study. Conclusion The readings obtained by TPSS were in agreement with ICDRG. TPSS can reduce the number of patient visits by 50% and may be used during COVID-19 times and beyond.

Inter-rater variability in patch test readings and final interpretation using store-forward teledermatology

BACKGROUND

Data regarding teledermatology for patch testing are limited.

OBJECTIVES

Compare patch test readings and final interpretation by two in-person dermatologists (IPDs) with eight teledermatologists (TDs).

METHODS

Patch tested patients had photographs taken of 70 screening series of allergens at 48 hours and second readings. Eight TDs reviewed photos and graded reactions (negative, irritant, doubtful, +, ++, +++) at 48 hours and second readings; in addition, they coded a final interpretation (allergic, indeterminant, irritant, negative) for each reaction. TDs rated overall image quality and confidence level for each patient and patch test reaction, respectively. Percentage of TD-IPD agreement based on clinical significance (success, indeterminate, and failure) was calculated. Primary outcome was agreement at the second reading.

RESULTS

Data were available for 99, 101, and 66 participants at 48 hours, second reading, and final interpretation, respectively. Pooled failure (+/++/+++ vs negative) at second reading was 13.6% (range 7.9%-20.4%). Pooled failure at 48 hours and final interpretation was 5.4% (range 2.9%-6.8%) and 24.6% (range 10.2%-36.8%), respectively. Confidence in readings was statistically correlated with quality of images and disagreement.

CONCLUSION

For patch testing, teledermatology has significant limitations including clinically significant pooled failure percentages of 13.6% for second readings and 24.6% for final interpretation.

Teledermatology in 2020: past, present and future perspectives

Born in 1995, teledermatology (TD) turns 25 years old today. Since then, TD evolved according to patients and physicians needs. The present review aimed to summarize all the efforts and experiences carried out in the field of TD and its subspecialties, the evolution and the future perspectives. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar. The state of the art of the "tele-dermo research" included TD and clinical trials, TD/TDS web platforms, TDS and artificial intelligence studies. Finally, the future perspective of TD/TDS in the era of social distancing was discussed. Using TD in specific situations adds several benefits including time-effectiveness of intervention and reduction in the waiting time for the first visit, reduced travel-costs, reduced sanitary costs, equalization of access from patient to specialistic consult. The communication technologies devices currently available can adequately support the growing needs of tele-assistance. A main limit is the current lack of a common clear European regulation for practicing TD, encompassing privacy issues and data management. The pandemic lockdown of 2020 has highlighted the importance of performing TD for all those patient, elderly and/or fragile, where the alternative would be no care at all. Many efforts are needed to develop efficient workflows and TD programs to facilitate the interplay among the different TD actors, along with practice guidelines or position statements.

Value of photo assessment in late patch test readings-A multicenter study from six European patch test clinics

BACKGROUND

It is recommended that patch test readings include a day (D)7 reading. Substitution of the D7 reading with a photo may be a valid option.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the sensitivity of digital photos at D7 to clinical readings, to assess the number of positive reactions appearing at D7 only (late reactions), and after D7 only (delayed reactions).

METHODS

Patients patch tested in six European clinics were instructed to forward photos of the patch test reactions to the respective clinics at D7 (before attending the clinic) and at D21. Only allergens in the baseline series or TRUE Test were included in the data analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-three of 629 patients had a total of 599 positive reactions, with 6.3% occurring at D7 only. When substituting the D7 reading with a photo (90% submitted), 26.3% of late reactions were missed and nine false-positive reactions were found. Delayed reactions were detected in four patients at D21 (65.3% submitted).

CONCLUSION

Our data show that if the D7 reading is not performed, 6.3% of positive reactions from the baseline series would be missed, and if substituting the D7 reading by digital photo, 26.3% late reactions would be missed. Delayed reactions seemed rare.

Pediatric allergic contact dermatitis. Part 2: Patch testing series, procedure, and unique scenarios

Patch testing is the criterion standard for diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis. Causative allergens differ between children and adults, necessitating the development of pediatric-specific patch test series. The Pediatric Baseline Series was developed in 2018 through expert consensus and includes relevant pediatric allergens that dermatologists can use in practice. Obstacles in patch testing, such as the need for multiple office visits, length of patch application, and avoidance of sweat and water on the testing area, are particularly challenging for the pediatric population, and several strategies are proposed. Aside from formal patch testing, alternatives like the repeat open application test and empiric allergen avoidance can be helpful in children. The key to management of allergic contact dermatitis is allergen avoidance, with emphasis on the need to properly identify causative allergens. Continued data collection through registries allows for a better understanding of the diagnosis and management of pediatric allergic contact dermatitis.

The role of mobile health technologies in allergy care: An EAACI position paper

Mobile health (mHealth) uses mobile communication devices such as smartphones and tablet computers to support and improve health-related services, data and information flow, patient self-management, surveillance, and disease management from the moment of first diagnosis to an optimized treatment. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology created a task force to assess the state of the art and future potential of mHealth in allergology. The task force endorsed the "Be He@lthy, Be Mobile" WHO initiative and debated the quality, usability, efficiency, advantages, limitations, and risks of mobile solutions for allergic diseases. The results are summarized in this position paper, analyzing also the regulatory background with regard to the "General Data Protection Regulation" and Medical Directives of the European Community. The task force assessed the design, user engagement, content, potential of inducing behavioral change, credibility/accountability, and privacy policies of mHealth products. The perspectives of healthcare professionals and allergic patients are discussed, underlining the need of thorough investigation for an effective design of mHealth technologies as auxiliary tools to improve quality of care. Within the context of precision medicine, these could facilitate the change in perspective from clinician- to patient-centered care. The current and future potential of mHealth is then examined for specific areas of allergology, including allergic rhinitis, aerobiology, allergen immunotherapy, asthma, dermatological diseases, food allergies, anaphylaxis, insect venom, and drug allergy. The impact of mobile technologies and associated big data sets are outlined. Facts and recommendations for future mHealth initiatives within EAACI are listed.

Recent trends in teledermatology and teledermoscopy

Teledermatology is a useful alternative where specialized dermatological assistance is not available and has been used successfully to support health professionals in a wide range of settings worldwide, in either an asynchronous store-and-forward format or a real-time video conferencing format. Teledermoscopy, which includes dermoscopic images in the teleconsultation, is another addition that improves remote assessments of pigmented lesions. A more recent variant is mobile teledermoscopy, which uses a smartphone to deliver the same type of service.

Teledermoscopy’s greatest strength may be as a triage and monitoring tool, as it can reduce the number of unnecessary referrals, wait times, and the cost of providing and receiving dermatological care. While face-to-face (FTF) care remains the gold standard for diagnosis, drawbacks of not using FTF care as the primary method can be mitigated if teleconsultants are willing to refer to FTF care whenever there is uncertainty. Teledermatology has generally been well accepted by patients and practitioners alike.

Barriers to the large-scale use of teledermatology remain. Assigning medicolegal responsibility and instituting a reimbursement system are critical to promoting widespread use by medical professionals, while privacy and security features and a mechanism to link teleconsultations to patients’ existing health records are essential to maximize patient benefit. Direct-to-consumer services also need attention from regulators to ensure that consumers can enjoy the benefits of telemedicine without the dangers of unregulated or untested platforms.