Comparison of Costs in Teledermatology Using PC and Camera Versus Smartphone.

Introduction: One of the challenges faced by the Colombian Health System is to improve access to health services for the dispersed and isolated rural population, particularly in the field of dermatology. This article examines the implementation of a teledermatology service using a PC and camera versus smartphone technology. Methods: A total of 542 teledermatology visits were conducted, involving 478 patients, in addition to 64 visits for clinical follow-up for patients as per the dermatologist's recommendation. Out of the 478 patients, 461 met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate in the study. The data collection instrument from the general practitioner or referring provider covered three consultation moments: (1) sending an initial consultation, (2) providing a response to the patient, and (3) sending a follow-up consultation. Seven hundred forty-seven records were completed by the general practitioner for the three consultation moments. Furthermore, 372 consultations were documented by the dermatologist or referring provider for two moments: (1) response to the initial consultation by the dermatologist, and (2) response to the follow-up consultation by the dermatologist. After validating the information reported in the instruments, a descriptive analysis of the data was conducted, utilizing absolute frequencies and percentages for qualitative variables and measures of central tendency (mean, median, standard deviation, and interquartile range) for quantitative variables. The data were analyzed from 747 records of the referring provider instrument related to 461 patients, between 18 and 98 years of age, with a predominantly female representation. Results: The results indicated that for teleconsultations conducted using a mobile device, the average total duration of the teleconsultation was longer on the traditional platform compared with the mobile device (13.03 vs. 8.27 min). Additionally, it was observed that the time taken to store, send, and capture a single image (clinical or dermoscopic) using the mobile device was three times lower than that on the conventional platform (25 vs. 75 s). Similar findings were noted for teleconsultations carried out by the dermatologist, predominantly utilizing a mobile device. The average consultation time was shorter for the mobile device compared with the traditional platform (8.14 vs. 12 min). Conclusions: The cost reduction suggests that the operation of the service is more efficient with smartphone technology in comparison to the use of a PC and camera. Teledermatology with smartphones provides a streamlined, efficient, and technically sound process for obtaining clinical and dermoscopic images.