An Exploration of Dutch Dermatologists' Experience and Satisfaction With Teledermatology: Sociotechnical and Complex Adaptive System Perspective.

Background: Despite the global upscale of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, persistent barriers, such as the poor anamnesis and photo quality, hinder its effective use in practice. Understanding Dutch dermatologists' experiences and satisfaction with using the teledermatology system in the Dutch health care system is needed. A holistic evaluation may provide valuable insight to understand how barriers interrelate which is deemed necessary for the innovation of teledermatology in practice.

Objective: Guided by a complex adaptive system perspective, this study aims to understand Dutch dermatologists' experience and satisfaction with their training, support communication, interaction, and usage of a teledermatology platform of a Dutch digital hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, uncovering insights to improve teledermatology services for the future.

Methods: A web-based questionnaire was sent in December 2021 to Dutch dermatologists who (1) had an active teledermatology platform account, and (2) responded to a teledermatology consultation between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. The questionnaire consisted of the validated Store-and-Forward Telemedicine Service User-satisfaction Questionnaire (SAF-TSUQ) questionnaire, and new questions regarding; demographics of teledermatologists, the use of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, the performance of teledermatology by general practitioners (GP), and the role of dermatologists in the teledermatology process. The open-ended questions were analyzed by a grounded theory approach guided by a sociotechnical model and complemented by a complex adaptive system perspective. A panel discussion with 3 dermatologists was performed to provide additional insight into the responses to the questionnaire.

Results: We obtained responses from 25 out of the 249 (10%) invited dermatologists. Overall, dermatologists had a positive experience with teledermatology. Interestingly, teledermatology use frequency remained unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the insufficient quality and incompleteness of the clinical content (photos and anamneses information) of the teledermatology consultation impacted the efficiency of the teledermatology workflow. Dermatologists expressed the need for improvement to avoid time-consuming processes or physical referrals. The panel discussion enriched and confirmed the responses, suggesting solutions like mandatory fields for the GPs for a complete anamnesis.

Conclusions: Dutch Dermatologists view teledermatology as a valuable tool to provide access to dermatology care. However, improvements regarding the quality and completeness of the provided clinical content are necessary for the effectiveness and efficiency of the complex teledermatology system in Dutch health care. This could increase both the dermatologists' satisfaction and the quality of teledermatology services. Managing trade-offs, such as time investments versus image quality, is crucial for teledermatology implementation and should be assessed from a complexity perspective to understand trade-offs and prevent unintended consequences.