Patient Factors Associated with Interest in Teledermatology: Cross-sectional Survey

Hybrid care potential of teledermatology: The importance of linking digital and physical practice and acceptance of online services: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

Telemedicine, with Teledermatology, has become a central component of modern medicine. Its importance, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, underlines its potential to optimize access for dermatological needs. The study aims to assess the potential of teledermatology, understand the importance of linking digital and physical practices, and analyze the adoption of online services based on participants' demographic and experiential factors.

Methods

This cross-sectional survey was conducted among users of the telemedicine platform from July 2022 to March 2023. The platform ("OnlineDoctor") allows users to contact dermatologists for remote dermatological consultations. The survey included questions about the participants' dermatological concerns, their reasons for using teledermatology, their satisfaction with the recommendations and their willingness to continue using telemedicine in the future. Data was collected via the RedCap online platform. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were carried out.

Results

Overall, 1141 people participated in the study (mean age 44.0 years [SD 14.6], 61.4% women). Results showed that 52.7% of participants with skin conditions had not consulted a dermatologist in the previous year. Shorter waiting times and the lack of face-to-face appointments were the main reasons for using the online platform. In total, 77.6% (n = 885) of participants indicated they would use teledermatology as their first choice if they had an upcoming skin condition. Age, gender, and satisfaction with previous consultations impacted the use of teledermatology as the first choice for future skin conditions.

Conclusion

Teledermatology is characterized by various benefits, including reduced waiting times and improved accessibility to treatment. Nevertheless, the study underscores the importance of a hybrid care approach with direct interaction with the physician. Teledermatology can be transformative in meeting dermatologic needs, mainly when traditional face-to-face consultation is limited. A deep understanding of user preferences and widespread adoption of digital services can pave the way for the successful adoption of teledermatology platforms, improving healthcare accessibility and efficiency.

Acceptance of Medical Artificial Intelligence in Skin Cancer Screening: Choice-Based Conjoint Survey

BACKGROUND

There is great interest in using artificial intelligence (AI) to screen for skin cancer. This is fueled by a rising incidence of skin cancer and an increasing scarcity of trained dermatologists. AI systems capable of identifying melanoma could save lives, enable immediate access to screenings, and reduce unnecessary care and health care costs. While such AI-based systems are useful from a public health perspective, past research has shown that individual patients are very hesitant about being examined by an AI system.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was two-fold: (1) to determine the relative importance of the provider (in-person physician, physician via teledermatology, AI, personalized AI), costs of screening (free, 10€, 25€, 40€; 1€=US $1.09), and waiting time (immediate, 1 day, 1 week, 4 weeks) as attributes contributing to patients' choices of a particular mode of skin cancer screening; and (2) to investigate whether sociodemographic characteristics, especially age, were systematically related to participants' individual choices.

METHODS

A choice-based conjoint analysis was used to examine the acceptance of medical AI for a skin cancer screening from the patient's perspective. Participants responded to 12 choice sets, each containing three screening variants, where each variant was described through the attributes of provider, costs, and waiting time. Furthermore, the impacts of sociodemographic characteristics (age, gender, income, job status, and educational background) on the choices were assessed.

RESULTS

Among the 383 clicks on the survey link, a total of 126 (32.9%) respondents completed the online survey. The conjoint analysis showed that the three attributes had more or less equal importance in contributing to the participants' choices, with provider being the most important attribute. Inspecting the individual part-worths of conjoint attributes showed that treatment by a physician was the most preferred modality, followed by electronic consultation with a physician and personalized AI; the lowest scores were found for the three AI levels. Concerning the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and relative importance, only age showed a significant positive association to the importance of the attribute provider (r=0.21, P=.02), in which younger participants put less importance on the provider than older participants. All other correlations were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the growing body of research using choice-based experiments to investigate the acceptance of AI in health contexts. Future studies are needed to explore the reasons why AI is accepted or rejected and whether sociodemographic characteristics are associated with this decision.