Tele-expertise for diagnosis of skin lesions is cost-effective in a prison setting: A retrospective cohort study of 450 patients

PLoS One. 2018 Sep 24;13(9):e0204545. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0204545. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Context: The prevalence of skin diseases among prisoners is higher than in the general population. Diagnosing and treating these lesions require a dermatologic advice. A tele-expertise network in dermatology for prisoners including 8 health facilities in prison and 2 hospital dermatological departments was developed to improve access to dermatologists' expertise in correctional facilities. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness and costs of tele-expertise in dermatology for prisoners.

Methods: We carried out a retrospective cohort study on data collected by the information system of the tele-expertise network. We used the MAST (Model for ASsessment of Telemedicine) model to perform a multidimensional assessment including the proportion of patients with a completed treatment plan for the skin lesions, the proportion of technical problems, the quality of the pictures, the investment and operating costs and the satisfaction of the professionals.

Results: Mean patient age was 34.2 years with 90% men. 511 requests for 450 patients were initiated. The delay from the connection to the tele-expertise software to the validation of the request was inferior to 7 min for 50% of the requests and inferior to 30 min for 85% of the requests. Overall, with tele-expertise, 82% of the patients had a completed treatment plan for the skin lesions, with 2.9% of all patients requiring a later face-to-face appointment or hospitalization, to be compared to a proportion of 35% of patients with a completed treatment plan when tele-expertise was not available. The most frequent lesions were acnea (22%) and atopic dermatitis (18%). The mean cost for one completed treatment plan was €184 by tele-expertise and €315 without tele-expertise. Tele-expertise was well accepted among physicians with all responders (n = 9) willing to continue using it.

Conclusion: Tele-expertise is a dominant intervention in comparison to a face-to face consultation taking into account the cost of transportation and the proportion of canceled appointments and is acceptable for physicians.

Trial registration: NCT02309905.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Attitude of Health Personnel
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Dermatology / economics
  • Dermatology / methods
  • Female
  • Health Information Systems
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Physicians / economics
  • Physicians / psychology
  • Prisoners
  • Prisons / economics*
  • Remote Consultation / economics*
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Skin Diseases / diagnosis*
  • Skin Diseases / economics*
  • Skin Diseases / epidemiology

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT02309905

Grants and funding

This research was funded by the Agence Régionale de Santé d'Ile de France (https://www.iledefrance.ars.sante.fr); grant number: CC/VP 154/2012. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.