1 / 26

Assessment Of Diagnostic Accuracy Using A Digital Camera For Teledermatology

Assessment Of Diagnostic Accuracy Using A Digital Camera For Teledermatology.

rosine
Télécharger la présentation

Assessment Of Diagnostic Accuracy Using A Digital Camera For Teledermatology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessment Of Diagnostic Accuracy Using A Digital Camera For Teledermatology

  2. Elizabeth Krupinski, PhDBen LeSueur, BSLansing Ellsworth, MDNorman Levine, MDRonald Hansen, MDNancy Silvis, MDPeter Sarantopoulos, BSPamela Hite, MD, MBAJames Wurzel, BSRonald Weinstein, MDAna Marie Lopez, MD, MPH

  3. Patients’ Opinions* • 24% satisfied by care from non-dermatologist • 89% satisfied by care from a dermatologist • 6% believe a generalist can treat their skin disease • 87% say access to dermatologist very important to their health care *Owen SA, Maeyens E, Weary PE. Patients’ opinions regarding direct access to dermatologic specialty care. JAAD 1997;36:250-256.

  4. Goal The goal of this study was to compare diagnostic accuracy of a dermatologic diagnosis based on in-person examination compared to diagnosis with still photo images acquired with a digital camera and displayed on a CRT monitor.

  5. Rationale Real-time video conferencing technologies may not be available or may be too costly for some rural sites. Store-forward technologies may be more appropriate, and should be tested before they are used clinically.

  6. Subjects & Readers • 308 consecutive patients referred for specialty consultation by PCP or general dermatologist to the Dermatology Clinic at the University of Arizona Health Sciences Center • 104 of these cases were ultimately biopsied • 3 board-certified specialty dermatologists

  7. Exams • Each dermatologist examined approximately 1/3 of the patients in person at the AHSC clinic • Rendered either a single diagnosis (75% of the cases, n = 230) or 2 or 3 differential diagnoses (25% of the cases, n = 78) • Up to 5 photos of the lesion ROIs were taken with a digital camera by 4 medical students trained in the use of the camera • Global and close-up shots

  8. The Digital Camera • Canon PowerShot600 • CCD image sensor • 832 x 608 pixels • 24-bit color resolution • f/2.5 lens • Built-in flash • 150 kB file size

  9. The Display • Gateway 2000 computer • Gateway CrystalScan color monitor: 1024 x 768 • PhotoImpact Album v 3.0 display software • Brief patient history in each case folder • Randomized case presentation

  10. Procedure • Approximately 2 months after in-person exams, digital images were examined • Same 3 dermatologists examined all 308 cases • Single most likely diagnosis rendered • Decision confidence: very definite, definite, probable, possible • Rate image sharpness & color: excellent, good, fair, poor • Viewing time recorded

  11. Analyses • In-person diagnosis = truth • Correct match = digital diagnosis matches one of the differential possibilities listed during in-person • Incorrect mismatch = digital diagnosis does not match any of the in-person differentials • For biopsy analyses, biopsy = truth

  12. Types of Cases Clinical DiagnosisNumber of Cases • Malignant or Premalignant 91 • Benign Proliferations 74 • Eczema/Dermatitis 36 • Pigmented Lesions 32 • Infections/Infestations 20 • Papulosquamous Disorders 12 • Urticarial & Allergic 5 • Collagen/Vascular 1 • Miscellaneous 37

  13. Biopsied Lesions Lesion TypeNumberPercent • Infection/Infestation 3 3% • Pigmented Lesions 26 25% • Malignant/Premalignant 49 47% • Dermatitis/Eczema 4 4% • Benign Proliferations 12 11% • Miscellaneous 10 10%

  14. Diagnostic Accuracy F = 0.011, df = 2, p = 0.989 no differences in accuracy between dermatologists Reader

  15. Decision Confidence Reader

  16. Observer Variation • Intra-Observer Variation • Reader 1: 90% agreement (n = 104 cases) • Reader 2: 85% agreement (n = 102 cases) • Reader 3: 76% agreement (n = 102 cases) • Inter-Observer Variation • Reader 1 vs 2: kappa = 0.82 • Reader 1 vs 3: kappa = 0.81 • Reader 2 vs 3: kappa = 0.80

  17. Correct Decisions Biopsy Cases In-Person Photo vs Photo vs Readervs BiopsyBiopsyIn-Person 1 80% 78% 87% 2 97% 76% 79% 3 90% 73% 85% Mean 89% 76%84%

  18. Biopsy vs In-Person Mismatches

  19. Image Quality Reader

  20. Correlations • Color & sharpness: r = 0.73 • Color & Decision Confidence: r = 0.48 • Sharpness & Decision Confidence: r = 0.47 • Decision confidence was not affected significantly by overall quality of the images

  21. Viewing Time Reader

  22. Correlations • View time vs color rating: r = 0.35 • View time vs sharpness rating: r = 0.24 • View time vs accuracy: r = 0.21 • View time vs confidence: r = 0.54 • View time vs single/multiple diagnoses: r = 0.15

  23. Conclusions • Digital photographycan be used to acquire dermatology images for telediagnosis • Image quality is overall excellent to good • Diagnostic accuracy and confidence are high • Digital image diagnoses compare favorably with in-person diagnoses and with biopsy results

More Related