The Teledermatology Experience: Cost Savings and Image Quality Control.

Introduction: Teledermatology adoption continues to increase, in part, spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study analyzes the utility and cost savings of a store-and-forward teledermatology consultative system within the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Methods: Retrospective cohort of 4,493 patients across 14 remote sites in Tennessee and Kentucky from May 2017 through August 2019. The study measured the agreement between the teledermatology diagnoses and follow-up face-to-face clinic evaluations as well as the cost effectiveness of the teledermatology program over the study period. Results: Fifty-four percent of patients were recommended for face-to-face appointment for biopsy or further evaluation. Most patients, 80.5% received their face-to-face care by a VA dermatologist. There was a high level of concordance between teledermatologist and clinic dermatologist for pre-malignant and malignant cutaneous conditions. Veterans were seen faster at a VA clinic compared with a community dermatology site. Image quality improved as photographers incorporated teledermatologist feedback. From a cost perspective, teledermatology saved the VA system $1,076,000 in community care costs. Discussion: Teledermatology is a useful diagnostic tool within the VA system providing Veteran care at a cost savings.

Celebrating a decade of the minor operations clinic: an approach at a regional New Zealand hospital.

BACKGROUND: A minor operations clinic has been providing a "one-stop shop" at our regional New Zealand hospital for the past decade to service management of skin lesions. This study aims to assess demographics, service characteristics, clinical standards and cost-savings from this setup, and to identify areas for improvement and potentially provide a model for other health units. METHODS: All patients seen between May 2009 and June 2019 were prospectively included. Data includes demographics, waitlist period, referral sources, follow-up destinations, histology including involvement of margins and cost. RESULTS: A total of 4,926 patients were included, with 6,442 procedures overall. Median age was 72 years old. The main source of referrals was primary care. The majority of patients were returned directly to primary care. Median wait-time was 66 days, and this remained static over the decade. 56.6% of excised lesions yielded malignant histology and 90.1% achieved clear margins. There was a calculated saving of NZ$607.00 per patient with our one-stop shop compared to our previous traditional model. A further calculated saving of NZ$452,028.50 was achieved by diverting complex procedures from requiring operating theatre environments. CONCLUSIONS: Our model provides successful, streamlined and cost-effective treatment of skin lesions for our community. This model (or aspects of) may be similarly effective in other regional centres.

Provision of Dermatologic Care in a Universal Health Care System: A 17-Year Review.

BACKGROUND: Limited data is available on the burden of dermatologic disease including disease distribution and providers of care. Research is needed to facilitate health care planning and improve patient care. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the demographics and economics of the provision of dermatologic care in a universal health care system from fiscal year 2000 to 2016. METHODS: A retrospective population-based analysis was performed on physician billing claims for dermatologic conditions from April 1, 2000 to March 31, 2017. Data came from the province of Ontario's universal health care plan claims records accessed through IntelliHealth. RESULTS: Dermatologic claims made up 3.6% of all physician claims, with a 20% increase seen over time. The cost of dermatologic claims increased by 70% between fiscal 2000 and 2016, with the average cost per claim increasing by 41%. However, the cost of dermatologic claims as a percentage of all health care claims experienced a decline from 3.5% in fiscal 2000 to 2.8% in fiscal 2016. Over the study period, family physicians submitted 56% to 62% of dermatologic claims, dermatologists 24% to 29%, pediatricians 3% to 4%, and internists 1%. Overall, internists billed the highest average cost per dermatologic claim ranging from $39 in 2000 to $60 in 2016, followed by pediatricians at $33 to $58, dermatologists at $28 to $39, and family physicians at $23 to $30. CONCLUSIONS: The demographic and economic burden of dermatologic disease is changing over time, with implications for health care planning, advancing medical education, and patient care.

Role of phototherapy in the era of biologics.

Phototherapy is a safe and effective treatment for many dermatologic conditions. With the advent of novel biologics and small molecule inhibitors, it is important to critically evaluate the role of phototherapy in dermatology. Surveys have shown that many dermatology residency programs do not dedicate time to teaching residents how to prescribe or administer phototherapy. Limitations of phototherapy include access to a center, time required for treatments, and insurance approval. Home phototherapy, a viable option, is also underused. However, it should be emphasized that modern phototherapy has been in use for over 40 years, has an excellent safety profile, and does not require laboratory monitoring. It can be safely combined with many other treatment modalities, including biologics and small molecule inhibitors. In addition, phototherapy costs significantly less than these novel agents. Dermatologists are the only group of physicians who have the expertise and proper training to deliver this treatment modality to our patients. Therefore, to continue to deliver high-quality, cost-effective care, it is imperative that phototherapy be maintained as an integral part of the dermatology treatment armamentarium.

Cost Minimization Analysis of a Teledermatology Triage System in a Managed Care Setting.

Importance: Teledermatology (TD) enables remote triage and management of dermatology patients. Previous analyses of TD systems have demonstrated improved access to care but an inconsistent fiscal impact. Objective: To compare the organizationwide cost of managing newly referred dermatology patients within a TD triage system vs a conventional dermatology care model at the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (hereafter referred to as the ZSFG) in California. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cost minimization analysis was conducted of 2098 patients referred to the dermatology department at the ZSFG between June 1 and December 31, 2017. Intervention: Implementation of the TD triage system in January 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was mean cost to the health care organization to manage newly referred dermatology patients with or without TD triage. To estimate costs, decision-tree models were constructed to characterize possible care paths with TD triage and within a conventional dermatology care model. Costs associated with primary care visits, dermatology visits, and TD visits were then applied to the decision-tree models to estimate the mean cost of managing patients following each care path for 6 months. The mean cost for each visit type incorporated personnel costs, with the mean cost per TD consultation also incorporating software implementation and maintenance costs. Finally, ZSFG patient data were applied within the models to evaluate branch probabilities, enabling calculation of mean cost per patient within each model. Results: The analysis captured 2098 patients (1154 men [55.0%]; mean [SD] age, 53.4 [16.8] years), with 1099 (52.4%) having Medi-Cal insurance and 879 (41.9%) identifying as non-White. In the decision-tree model with TD triage, the mean (SD) cost per patient to the health care organization was $559.84 ($319.29). In the decision-tree model for conventional dermatology care, the mean (SD) cost per patient was $699.96 ($390.24). Therefore, the TD model demonstrated a statistically significant mean (SE) cost savings of $140.12 ($11.01) per patient. Given an annual dermatology referral volume of 3150 patients, the analysis estimates an annual savings of $441 378. Conclusions and Relevance: Implementation of a TD triage system within the dermatology department at the ZSFG was associated with cost savings, suggesting that managed health care settings may experience significant cost savings from using TD to triage and manage patients.

Administrative Burden and Costs of Prior Authorizations in a Dermatology Department.

Importance: Insurance companies use prior authorizations (PAs) to address inappropriate prescribing or unnecessary variations in care, most often for expensive medications. Prior authorizations negatively affect patient care and add costs and administrative burden to dermatology offices. Objective: To quantify the administrative burden and costs of dermatology PAs. Design, Setting, and Participants: The University of Utah Department of Dermatology employs 2 full-time and 8 part-time PA staff. In this cross-sectional study at a large academic department spanning 11 clinical locations, these staff itemized all PA-related encounters over a 30-day period in September 2016. Staff salary and benefits were publicly available. Data were analyzed between December 2018 and August 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of visits requiring PAs, median administrative time to finalize a PA (either approval or denial after appeal), and median cost per PA type. Results: In September 2016, 626 PAs were generated from 9512 patient encounters. Staff spent 169.7 hours directly handling PAs, costing a median of $6.72 per PA. Biologic PAs cost a median of $15.80 each and took as long as 31 business days to complete. The costliest PA equaled 106% of the associated visit's Medicare reimbursement rate. Approval rates were 99.6% for procedures, 78.9% for biologics, and 58.2% for other medications. After appeal, 5 of 23 (21.7%) previously denied PAs were subsequently approved. Conclusions and Relevance: Prior authorizations are costly to dermatology practices and their value appears limited for some requests. Fewer unnecessary PAs and appeals might increase practice efficiency and improve patient outcomes.

Evaluating the effect of prior authorizations in patients with complex dermatologic conditions.

BACKGROUND: In dermatology, prior authorizations can delay treatment, decrease patient adherence, and deter providers from advocating for their patients. Patients with complex dermatologic conditions, often requiring off-label treatments, may face particularly significant insurance barriers. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of prior authorizations in patients with complex dermatologic conditions. METHODS: This prospective cohort study assessed patients treated by a dermatologist during 5 months who specialized in complex dermatology. Patients included were older than 18 years, treated at V.P.W.'s rheumatology-dermatology clinic, and prescribed a medication or ordered a diagnostic procedure that elicited an insurance prior authorization. Data on prior authorization outcome, administrative time, and delay to treatment were collected. RESULTS: Of 51 prior authorizations, 51% were initially denied, with systemic medications more likely denied than topical ones (P < .001). Total administrative time spent on 50 prior authorizations tracked was 62.5 hours (median time per prior authorization 30 minutes [interquartile range 17-105 minutes]). Time to access treatment was tracked for 80% of prior authorizations; median delay was 12 days [interquartile range 5.5-23 days]. LIMITATIONS: Single-center, single-provider patient panel. CONCLUSION: Patients with complex dermatologic conditions face a significant barrier to care because of prior authorizations. The administrative burden for provider practices to address these prior authorizations is substantial and may warrant a streamlined system in collaboration with insurers.

The aftermath of COVID-19 in dermatology practice: What's next?

The rapidly increasing number of COVID-19-infected patients and evidence of human-to-human transmission even within the asymptomatic incubation period prompted the attention of the entire world. The field of dermatology and procedural dermatology is not exempt from this global issue. We cannot deny the fact that this situation will have a lasting impact on the health-seeking behaviors of our patients. It is necessary for dermatologists and dermatologic surgeons to be aware of the potential risks and precautions when re-emerging their practices after COVID-19.

The Potential Impact of Social Genomics on Wound Healing.

Significance: Human skin wounds carry an immense epidemiologic and financial burden, and their impact will continue to grow with an aging population and rising incidence of comorbid conditions known to affect wound healing. To comprehensively address this growing clinical issue, physicians should also be aware of how conditions of the human social environment may affect wound healing. Here we provide a review of the emerging field of social genomics and its potential impact on the wound healing. Recent Advances: Multiple studies using human and animal models have correlated social influences and their contributing effects to acute and chronic stress with delays in wound healing. Furthermore, observations between nongenetic factors such as nutrition, socioeconomic, and educational status have also shown to have a direct or indirect impact on clinical outcomes of wound healing. Critical Issues: Nutrition, financial burden, socioeconomic and education status, and acute and chronic stress are variables that have either direct (epigenetic) or indirect impact on wound healing and patients' quality of life. Wound care is costly and remains a challenge placing economic burden on patients. Furthermore, poor clinical outcomes and complications including loss of mobility and disability may lead to job loss, further contributing to socioeconomic related stress. Thus, the economic burden and inadequate wound healing are intertwined, making each other worse. Future Directions: Although some evidence regarding the specific changes in genetic pathways imparted by conditions of the social environment exists, further studies are warranted to identify potential mechanisms, interventions, and prevention approaches.

The relationship between the number of available therapeutic options and government payer (medicare part D) spending on topical drug products.

The cost of prescription drugs has increased at rates far exceeding general inflation in recent history, with topical drugs increasing at a disproportionate rate compared to other routes of administration. We assessed the relationship between net changes in the number of therapeutic options, defined as any approved drug or therapeutic equivalent on the market, and prescription topical drug spending. Drugs were divided based on the category of use through pairing of Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drug products databases. Across drug classes, we modeled the log of the ratio of total spending per unit in 2015 to total spending per unit in 2011 as a linear function of net number of topical therapeutic options over this time period. Primary outcomes include total Medicaid Part D spending on topical drugs and net change in the number of available therapeutic options within each category of use. Total spending on topical drugs increased by 61%, while the number of units dispensed increased by only 18% from 2011-2015. The greatest total spending increases were in categories with few new therapeutic options, such as topical corticosteroid and antifungal medications. Each net additional therapeutic option during 2011-2015 was associated with an reduction in how much relative spending per unit increased (95% CI 2.5%-14.4%, p = 0.013). Stimulating greater competition through increasing the net number of therapeutic options within each major topical category of use may place downward pressure on topical prescription drug spending under medicare Part D.

The clinical and economic burden of community-onset complicated skin and skin structure infections in Korea.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To investigate epidemiologic characteristics, clinical and economic burdens, and factors associated with mortality in complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) patients in Korea. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, nationwide study was conducted between April to July 2012 at 14 tertiary-hospitals in Korea. Eligible patients were hospitalized adults with community acquired cSSSI, who underwent surgical intervention and completed treatment between November 2009 and October 2011. Data on demography, clinical characteristics, outcomes and medical resource utilization were collected through medical record review. Direct medical costs were calculated by multiplying quantities of resources utilized by each unit price in Korea. RESULTS: Of 473 patients enrolled, 449 patients (except 24 patients with no record on surgical intervention) were eligible for analysis. Microbiological testing was performed on 66.1% of patients and 8.2% had multiple pathogens. Among culture confirmed pathogens (n = 297 patients, 340 episodes), 76.2% were gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus; 41.2%) and 23.8% were gram-negative. The median duration of hospital stay was 16 days. Among treated patients, 3.3% experienced recurrence and 4.2% died in-hospital. The mean direct medical costs amounted to $4,195/ person, with the greatest expenses for hospitalization and antibiotics. The in-hospital mortality and total medical costs were higher in combined antibiotics therapy than monotherapy (p < 0.05). Charlson's comorbidity index ≥ 3, standardized early warning scoring ≥ 4, sub-fascia infections and combined initial therapy, were all found to be associated with higher mortality. CONCLUSION: Korean patients with community-onset cSSSI suffer from considerable clinical and economic burden. Efforts should be made to reduce this burden through appropriate initial treatment.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology: Where are we now, and what are the barriers to adoption?

There has been rapid growth in teledermatology over the past decade, and teledermatology services are increasingly being used to support patient care across a variety of care settings. Teledermatology has the potential to increase access to high-quality dermatologic care while maintaining clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Recent expansions in telemedicine reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ensure that teledermatology will play an increasingly prominent role in patient care. Therefore, it is important that dermatologists be well informed of both the promises of teledermatology and the potential practice challenges a continuously evolving mode of care delivery brings. In this article, we will review the evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology and we will discuss system-level and practice-level barriers to successful teledermatology implementation as well as potential implications for dermatologists.

Cost of Treating Skin Problems in Patients with Diabetes Who Use Insulin Pumps and/or Glucose Sensors.

Background: The use of insulin pump and glucose sensor is advantageous, but unfortunately many experience skin problems. To reduce or overcome skin problems, patients use additional products or change their sets preterm. Therefore, the aim was to investigate costs related to skin problems. Materials and Methods: Two hundred sixty-three patients from four different hospitals in Denmark participated in a cross-sectional survey about skin problems related to insulin pump and/or glucose sensor use. Additional costs aside technology and diabetes treatment were calculated based on adhesives, patches, lotion, and preterm shifts of infusion or sensor sets due to skin problems. Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used. Results: The total costs for all these expenses were 11493.9 U.S. dollars (USD) in 145 pediatric patients and 4843 USD in 118 adult patients. The costs were higher in patients with, than without, skin problems and for skin problems due to the glucose sensor compared with insulin pump. Pediatric patients with eczema and/or wound due to the glucose sensor did cost 154.3 USD more, than patients without these skin problems (P < 0.01). We found a clear dose/response relationship between costs and severity of skin problems, especially in pediatric patients. Conclusions: Our data show that skin problems due to use of insulin pump and/or glucose sensor have significant costs on the Danish welfare system. This leaves an economic incentive for developing more skin-sensitive adhesive for the infusion set and sensors, at least for a certain subgroup of patients.

The growth of teledermatology: Expanding to reach the underserved.

The regulation of telemedicine in the United States is evolving, with new legislation expanding reimbursement and cross-state licensing capabilities. As telemedicine grows, communities with limited access to traditional dermatologic care may find a solution in teledermatology. A search of the medical literature and online health care law resources published within the past decade was performed to assess the current status of telemedicine availability, health record integration and security, reimbursement policy, and licensure requirements in the United States, with a focus on teledermatology. The majority of states have implemented policies requiring private insurance coverage. Medicaid reimburses some form of telemedicine in all states but restricts which modalities can be used and by which specialties. Medicare places the heaviest limitations on telemedicine coverage. Twenty-four states and Guam are members of the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC), and 27 states offer alternative cross-state practice options. With the advent of publicly and privately funded programs, volunteer efforts, and mobile applications, teledermatology is more readily available to rural and underserved communities.