Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37632975›Full record

ArticleJMIR dermatology2023

General Practitioners' Perspectives About Remote Dermatology Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Netherlands: Questionnaire-Based Study.

Esmée Tensen, Craig Kuziemsky, Monique W Jaspers, Linda W Peute

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR dermatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Esmée TensenDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7691-8315
Craig KuziemskyMacEwan University, Edmonton, AB, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3904-5372
Monique W JaspersDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8040-9153
Linda W PeuteDepartment of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam UMC location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9859-0912
GGD Amsterdam · NLKSYOS TeleMedical Centre · NLMacEwan University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic affected the delivery of primary care and stimulated the use of digital health solutions such as remote digital dermatology care. In the Netherlands, remote store-and-forward dermatology care was already integrated into Dutch general practice before the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is unclear how general practitioners (GPs) experienced this existing digital dermatology care during the pandemic period.

objectiveWe investigated GPs' perspectives about facilitators and barriers related to store-and-forward digital dermatology care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, using a sociotechnical approach.

methodsIn December 2021, a web-based questionnaire was distributed via email to approximately 3257 GPs who could perform a digital dermatology consultation and who had started a digital consultation (not necessarily dermatology) in the previous 2 years. The questionnaire consisted of general background questions, questions from a previously validated telemedicine service user satisfaction questionnaire, and newly added questions related to the pandemic and use of the digital dermatology service in general practice. The open-ended and free-text responses were analyzed for facilitators and barriers using content analysis, guided by an 8-dimensional sociotechnical model.

resultsIn total, 71 GPs completed the entire questionnaire, and 66 (93%) questionnaires were included in the data analysis. During the questionnaire distribution period, another national lockdown, social distancing, and stay-at-home mandates were announced; thus, GPs may have had increased workload and limited time to complete the questionnaire. Of the 66 responding GPs, 36 (55%) were female, 25 (38%) were aged 35-44 years, 33 (50%) were weekly platform users, 34 (52%) were working with the telemedicine organization for >5 years, 42 (64%) reported that they used the store-and-forward platform as often during as before the pandemic, 61 (92%) would use the platform again, 53 (80%) would recommend the platform to a colleague, and 10 (15%) used digital dermatology home consultation. Although GPs were generally satisfied with the digital dermatology service, platform, and telemedicine organization, they also experienced crucial barriers to the use of the service during the pandemic. These barriers were GPs' and patients' limited digital photography skills, costs and the lack of appropriate equipment, human-computer interface and interoperability issues on the telemedicine platform, and different use procedures of the digital dermatology service.

conclusionsAlthough remote dermatology care was already integrated into Dutch GP practice before the pandemic, which may have facilitated the positive responses of GPs about the use of the service, barriers impeded the full potential of its use during the pandemic. Training is needed to improve the use of equipment and quality of (dermoscopy) images taken by GPs and to inform GPs in which circumstances they can or cannot use digital dermatology. Furthermore, the dermatology platform should be improved to also guide patients in taking photographs with sufficient quality.

Indexed as

COVID-19dermatologydermoscopyfamily physiciangeneral practicegeneral practitionerGPmobile phoneperspectivequestionnaireremote careteledermatologyteledermoscopytelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID37632975
PMCPMC10335141
OpenAlexW4380481253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.