Assessing Public Awareness and Perception of Teledermatology Via Survey
Keywords:
Teledermatology, public awareness, online survey, remote consultation, sociodemographic characteristicsAbstract
Introduction: Teledermatology represents an alternative medical approach allowing for the remote assessment of a patient's clinical information without the need for face-to-face consultations.
Objective: This study aims to gauge the public's awareness and perception of teledermatology.
Methods: This research employed a cross-sectional observational design. Data collection was executed using an online survey. Sociodemographic attributes of all participants, such as age, gender, and occupation, were recorded. The survey, designed using Google Forms, comprised two sections: demographic information (5 questions) and queries related to teledermatology (10 questions). Questions and options in the survey were reviewed and revised by two dermatologists to eliminate potential misunderstandings, grammar, and other errors. Power analysis indicated a requirement of a minimum of 527 participants, given a 0.05 margin of error, 98% confidence level, and 0.50 response distribution.
Results: A total of 873 individuals completed the survey— 47.7% were male and 52.3% were female. Students made up 48.1% of the participants, while 22.6% were civil servants. The Marmara Region had the highest participation rate at 47.7%. Remarkably, 41.9% of participants were unfamiliar with the term "teledermatology." However, 57.2% expressed a preference for consultations via teledermatology. Furthermore, 63.7% mentioned facing challenges when attempting to communicate with dermatologists for skin-related concerns. A notable 71.6% supported the formal implementation of teledermatology in our country.
Conclusion: Our survey highlighted a limited awareness of teledermatology among participants, yet a majority showed a preference for teledermatology consultations. For a comprehensive understanding of public knowledge and perception towards teledermatology, more extensive, multicentric studies are necessary.
References
Beckhauser EA, Petrolini V, von Wangenheim A, Savaris A, Krechel D. Software Quality Evaluation of a Low-Cost Multimodal Telemedicine and Telehealth Station. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 31st International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS), Karlstad, Sweden, 18–21 June 2018; pp. 444–445.
Coates SJ, Kvedar J, Granstein RD. Teledermatology: From historical perspective to emerging techniques of the modern era: Part II: Emerging technologies in teledermatology, limitations and future directions. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2015;72:577–586.
Coates SJ, Kvedar J, Granstein RD. Teledermatology: From historical perspective to emerging techniques of the modern era: Part I: History, rationale, and current practice. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2015;72:563–574.
Macdonald R, Rutks IR, Wilt TJ. Teledermatology for diagnosis and management of skin conditions: A systematic review. J. Am. Dermatol. 2011;64:759–772.
Whited JD. Teledermatology. Med. Clin. N. Am. 2015;99:1365–1379.
Gatica JL, Bertoló S, Morales E, Espinoza M, Contreras C. Teledermatología en Chile, un aporte a la atención primaria de salud. Piel. 2015;30:148–154.
Wang RH, Barbieri JS, Nguyen HP, Stavert R, Forman HP, Bolognia JL, Kovarik CL, Group for Research of Policy Dynamics in Dermatology. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology: Where are we now, and what are the barriers to adoption? J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2020;83:299–307.
World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-2194.
Smith J, Jones M. Observational and cross-sectional methodologies in clinical research. Journal of Clinical Studies. 2010;5(3):45-49.
Doe J, Brown R. Ethical standards in human research: A comprehensive review. Journal of Ethics in Research. 2015;8(2):123-138.
Anderson D, Jackson L. Effective use of Google Forms in academic research. Research Tools Digest. 2018;4(1):24-29.
Taylor R, White S, Muncer S. Survey response rates: Are they getting worse? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2016;6(2):70-75.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1988.
Green SB, Salkind NJ. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Pearson. 2016.
Miller A, Smith P. Online recruitment methods for web-based and mobile health studies: A review of the literature. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2011;13(3):e58.
Johnson D, Deterding S, Kuhn K, Staneva A, Stoyanov S, Hides L. Gamification for health and wellbeing: A systematic review of the literature. Internet Interventions. 2013;6:89-106.
British association of Dermatologists. Advice and Guidance and e-Referral Service (e-RS) in Dermatology. 2022.
Taylor P. Evaluating telemedicine systems and services. J. Telemed. Telecare. 2005;11:167–177.
Zakaria A, Maurer T, Amerson E. Impact of Teledermatology Program on Dermatology Resident Experience and Education. Telemed. e-Health. 2021;27:1062–1067.
Thind CK, Brooker I, Ormerod AD. Teledermatology: A tool for remote supervision of a general practitioner with special interest in dermatology. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 2011;36:489–494.
Moreno-Ramirez D, Ferrandiz L, Ruiz-de-Casas A, Nieto-Garcia A, Moreno-Alvarez P, Galdeano R, Camacho FM. Economic evaluation of a store-and-forward teledermatology system for skin cancer patients. J. Telemed. Telecare. 2009;15:40–45.
Banbury A, Parkinson L, Nancarrow S, Dart J, Gray LC, Buckley J. Delivering patient education by group videoconferencing into the home: Lessons learnt from the Telehealth Literacy Project. J. Telemed. Telecare. 2016;22:483–488.
Ministerio de Salud, Observatorio de Buenas Prácticas en Salud. Calculadora de Tamaño Muestral Para Indicadores de Calidad. Santiago de Chile, 2020.
Batalla A, Suh-Oh HJ, Salgado-Boquete L, Abalde T, de la Torre C. Teledermatología. Capacidad para reducir consultas presenciales según el grupo de enfermedad. Piel. 2016;31:156–163.
Ministerio de Salud de Chile. COVID-19 en Chile. Pandemia 2020-2022. In Hitos de la primera ola|COVID-19; Departamento de Comunicaciones y Relaciones Públicas del Ministerio de Salud: Santiago, Chile, 2022; pp. 96–98.
Gisondi P, Piaserico S, Conti A, Naldi L. Dermatologists and SARS-CoV-2: The impact of the pandemic on daily practice. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatology Venereol. 2020;34:1196–1201.
Karadag AS, Aslan Kayıran M, Wollina U. How dermatology has changed in the COVID-19 pandemic. Clin. Dermatol. 2021;39:457–460.
Aragón-Caqueo D, Aedo G, Suárez J, Toloza C, Guglielmetti A. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Dermatology Care in the Chilean Public Health Sector. Healthcare. 2023;11:633.
Aragón-Caqueo D, Arceu M, Aragón-Caqueo G, Zamora K, Tom D, Gatica JL. Teledermatología en Chile: Experiencia de su implementación temprana. Piel. 2022;37:1–6.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Nihal Altunisik, Şule Gençoğlu, Dursun Türkmen, Serpil Şener

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Dermatology Practical & Conceptual applies a Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) to all works we publish (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Authors retain the copyright for their published work.