BT38 Patient satisfaction of teledermoscopy service in a UK university health board: a service evaluation

Abstract Around 20 000 teledermatology referrals are reviewed by dermatology consultants in our UK university health board each year, including urgent suspected cancer referrals. More recently, an additional ‘teledermoscopy service’ was introduced so that dermatology consultants can request dermoscopy photos – in addition to standard clinical photos – for remote review. With the rising incidence of skin cancer in the UK, and a backlog of referrals created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the demand for access to dermatological care heightens the need for teledermatology services, including teledermoscopy. This service evaluation sought to evaluate the patient satisfaction of the new teledermoscopy service. Over 3 weeks, patient satisfaction of the teledermoscopy service was assessed via a 14-question survey that was developed and piloted in a neighbouring health board. The survey was offered to patients after their appointment in the medical illustration teledermoscopy clinic. Waiting times, hospital accessibility, preappointment information and appointment experience were evaluated using Likert scaling, a five-point scale using the terms; ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘don’t know’, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’. Overall experience was assessed on a scale of 1–10, and the final question of the survey allowed for free writing of any comments the participants had. In total, 100 patients (mean age 55 years, range 16–90; 42% male) responded to the survey. Overall, 84 of 100 respondents replied to the question asking them to rate their overall experience from 1 to 10: 83 of 84 (99%) rated the service ≥ 8 out of 10, and 62 of 84 (74%) respondents rated the service 10 out of 10. With regards to patient experiences of the appointment, the responses were very positive: 98 of 100 respondents (98%) ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that the procedure was clearly explained to them, and 99% of respondents ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ that the photographer acted professionally, and the photographic environment was appropriate. Contrastingly, the responses regarding the preappointment information were less positive: 35 of 99 patients (35%) ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ that they were given sufficient information about the teledermatology service prior to their appointment. Importantly, 9 of the 100 (9%) reported that they thought their appointment was to see a dermatologist, not a medical photographer. In total, 85 of 100 patients (85%) agreed that the hospital was easy to attend, while 6 of the 100 (6%) expressed a preference for a closer hospital. Finally, 18 of the 100 respondents answered the open-ended ‘further comments’ question. The written feedback provided was mostly positive. The majority of patients were highly satisfied with the teledermoscopy service; however, over one-third felt that more information was needed prior to their appointment.