The diagnostic accuracy of the mobile phone teledermatoscopy
Abstract
The positive predictive value (PPV) of smart mobile phone teledermatoscopy is not known. The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPVs) of smart mobile phone teledermatoscopy. Over a period of 6 months, up to three clinical and dermatoscopic images were obtained of 67 skin lesions from 67 patients using a mobile phone camera and standard pocket dermatoscopy device. Out of the 67 patients, 44 were men (65.67%) and 23 were women (34.32%). The mean age of the patients was 39.56 ± 22.19 years (ranging from 18 to 92). The majority of the lesions (71.64%; n=48) were benign, while 11.94% (n=8) of the biopsies were premalignant and 16.41% (n=11) of the lesions were malignant. The sensitivity for the diagnosis of benign, premalignant, and malignant lesions were 93.8%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. PPVs for the diagnosis of benign, premalignant, and malignant lesions were 93.8%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity and PPVs of all lesions were 95.9% and 95.7%. The accuracy of the teledermatoscopic consultation with a mobile phone is very high. We therefore think that it can be a cost effective and useful method in the consultation at distance.References
Kromer S, Frühauf J, Campbell TM, Massone C, Schwantzer G, et al. Mobile teledermatology for skin tumour screening: Diagnostic accuracy of clinical and dermoscopic image tele-evaluation using cellular phones. Br J Dermatol 2011; 164(5): 973–979. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10208.x.
Dekio I, Hanada E, Chinuki Y, Akaki T, Kitani M, et al. Usefulness and economic evaluation of ADSL-based live interactive teledermatology in areas with shortage of dermatologists. Int J Dermatol 2010; 49(11): 1272–1275. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2010.04572.x.
Rosendahl C, Tschandl P, Cameron A, Kittler H. Diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy for melanocytic and nonmelanocytic pigmented lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol 2011; 64(6): 1068–1073. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2010.03.039.
Börve A, Terstappen K, Sanberg C, Paoli J. Mobile teledermoscopy-there’s an app for that! Dermatol Pract Concept 2013; 3(2): 41–48. doi: 10.5826/dpc.0302a05.
Massone C, Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, Gabler G, Ebner C, Soyer HP. Melanoma screening with cellular phones. PloS One 2007; 2(5): e483. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000483.
Bilgili ME, Yildiz H, Cengiz BP, Saydam IM. Effect of preoperative evaluation by a dermatologist on diagnostic accuracy. Dermatol Surg 2014; 40(12): 1402–1408. doi: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000000168.
Wu X, Oliverias SA, Yagerman S, Chen L, DeFazio J, et al. Feasibility and efficacy of patients-initiated mobile teledermoscopy for short-tern monitoring of clinically atypical nevi. JAVA Dermatol 2015; 151(5): 489–496. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.3837.
Yildiz H, Abuaf OK, Bilgili ME. The use of teledermatology in daily practices among dermatologist in Turkey. Turk J Dermatol 2014; 8: 7–11. doi: 10.4274/tdd.1526.
Moreno-Ramirez D, Ferrandiz L, Ruiz-de-Casas A, Nieto-Garcia A, Moreno-Alvarez P, et al. Economic evaluation of a store-and-forward teledermatology system for skin cancer patients. J Telemed Telecare 2009; 15(1): 40–45. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2008.080901.
Prednia DA, Allen A. Telemedicine technology and clinical applications. JAMA 1995; 133: 171–174. doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520300057037.
Şenel E, Baba M, Durdu M. The contribution of teledermatoscopy to the diagnosis and management of non-melanocytic skin tumours. J Telemed Telecare 2013; 19(1): 60–63. doi: 10.1177/1357633X12474961.
Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: Predictive values. BMJ 1994; 309(6947): 102. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6947.102.
Har-Shai Y, Hai N, Taran A, Mayblum S, Barak A, et al. Sensitivity and positive predictive values of presurgical diagnosis of excised benign and malignant skin tumors: A prospective study of 835 lesions in 778 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001; 108(7): 1982–1989. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200112000-00022.
Guggenmoos-Holzmann I, van Houwelingen HC. The (in) validity of sensitivity and specificity. Stat Med 2000; 19: 1783–1792. doi: 10.1002/1097-0258(20000715)19:13<1783::AID-SIM497>3.0.CO;2-B.
Copyright (c) 2022 Hamza Yildiz, Memet Ersan Bilgili, Hasan Aktug Simsek
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License
Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit and that the work is not used for commercial purposes. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.
This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.
