Evaluation of Store-and-Forward Teledermatology Versus a Face-to-Face Assessment During a Skin Cancer Screening Event

July 17, 2017 updated by: University of California, Davis

The purpose of this study is to determine the diagnostic and management concordance of face-to-face dermatologist versus a store-and-forward teledermatologist at a skin cancer screening event.

The investigators' hypotheses include the following:

  1. Compared to in-person assessment, store-and-forward teledermatology assessment will result in adequate diagnostic concordance.
  2. Compared to in-person assessment, store-and-forward teledermatology results in adequate management concordance.
  3. The sensitivity and specificity of store-and-forward evaluation to detecting lesions that are either premalignant or malignant will be similar to that of in-person evaluation.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

170

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • California
      • Sacramento, California, United States, 95818
        • University of California, Davis Shifa Community Clinic

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years of age or older at time of consent, may be male or female.
  • Able to provide a brief medical history and have/allow an examination of their skin including photographs.
  • Capable of giving informed consent.
  • Will be able to receive notification of follow-up recommendations

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who will not provide informed consent
  • Patient who are unable to fulfill tasks of this study

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: SCREENING
  • Allocation: NON_RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
OTHER: In-person dermatology evaluation
Health care modality
Every patient will be evaluated by an in person dermatologist present at the screening.
OTHER: Store-and-forward teledermatology evaluation
Health care modality
Every patient will be evaluated online via a store and forward teledermatology modality.
Other Names:
  • Health care modality

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Aggregated diagnostic concordance
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Aggregated diagnostic concordance which is defined as the agreement of the in-person dermatologist's principle diagnosis with the teledermatologist's primary diagnosis or any of the differential diagnoses.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Primary diagnostic concordance
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Diagnostic concordance between the in-person dermatologist and the teledermatologist for their primary diagnosis.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Categorical diagnostic concordance
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Diagnostic concordance between the in-person dermatologist and teledermatologist based on standard clinical diagnostic categories for each lesion.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Management concordance
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
The concordance between the in-person dermatologist and teledermatologist for the chosen management plan for each lesion.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Sensitivity
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
The sensitivity of store-and-forward evaluation to detecting lesions that are either premalignant or malignant.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
Specificity
Time Frame: At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)
The specificity of store-and-forward evaluation to detecting lesions that are either premalignant or malignant.
At the time of dermatologist evaluation (Day 1)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: April W Armstrong, MD, MPH, University of California, Davis

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

September 1, 2010

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

June 1, 2011

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

June 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 4, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 25, 2013

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

March 28, 2013

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

July 19, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 17, 2017

Last Verified

March 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 201018315

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Telemedicine

Clinical Trials on In-person dermatology evaluation

3
Subscribe