Die Teledermatologie hat in den deutschsprachigen Ländern wie auch weltweit einen zunehmenden Stellenwert und bietet aufgrund des hohen Innovationsgrades eine Vorreiter- und Vorbildfunktion für weitere telemedizinische Anwendungen anderer Fachrichtungen. Eine qualitätsgesicherte teledermatologische Behandlung ist in den deutschsprachigen Ländern praktikabel und kann zu einem relevanten Mehrnutzen in der Versorgung führen. Ihr Einsatz ist immer dann in Erwägung zu ziehen, wenn relevante Zusatznutzen für die Patienten ohne relevante Nachteile für sie und für die Versorgenden zu erwarten sind. Für die teledermatologische Behandlung wurden mit dem vorliegenden Konsensuspapier praxisrelevante Maßgaben festgelegt. Etwaige situationsabhängige Limitationen in der Versorgung sind stets zu beachten.

Background: The Swiss psoriasis registry SDNTT (Swiss Dermatology Network for Targeted Therapies) records the long-term safety and effectiveness of systemic treatment regimens for psoriasis. Patients and Methods: Patients with moderate to severe psoriasis are included in the SDNTT when treatment with a conventional systemic agent or biologic is initiated that was not previously used by the respective patient. Patients are followed over a 5-year period. Clinical data are obtained every 3-6 months using standardized case report forms. Here, baseline data and follow-up data for 1 year of patients included from October 2011 until December 2014 were analyzed. Results: Within 39 months, 323 patients from 7 tertiary dermatology centers in Switzerland were recruited in the SDNTT; 165 patients received biologics and 158 conventional systemic therapies. Patients treated with biologics had a significantly higher severity (PASI 11.3 vs. 9.2, BSA 15.6 vs.11.9, psoriatic arthritis 36.4 vs. 10.8%; p ≤ 0.005, p ≤ 0.013, p ≤ 0.001) and a longer duration of illness (19.2 vs. 14.4 years, p ≤ 0.003) compared to patients starting a conventional systemic treatment. PASI reduction was satisfying in both treatment groups, with 60.6% of patients treated with biologics achieving PASI75 after 1 year compared to 54.2% of patients receiving conventional systemic drugs (nonsignificant). On average, the drug survival in patients receiving a biologic therapy was significantly longer than those receiving conventional systemic treatments (30.5 vs. 19.2 months, p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: In the real-world setting of a prospective national therapy registry, the application of current therapeutic guidelines for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis resulted in a PASI reduction of approximately 70% within the first year of treatment, but current therapeutic targets of PASI75 and PASI90 were reached in only 58 and 36% of patients, respectively, at 1 year, highlighting a gap in efficacy between selective clinical trials and the real-world setting.

Telemedicine is the practice of healthcare using interactive audio, visual and data communication. This includes healthcare delivery, diagnoses, consultation and treatment as well as education and transfer of medical data. The transmission of multimedia streams has remained a major challenge. Although the Internet remains basically insecure, technology allows today to define and implement complete security profiles for specific (medical) communities. Data security is a must as in all other areas of applied medicine. Teledermatology offers possibilities in consulting, continuous medical education or teleteaching. In the future, consulting and asking for a second opinion will be the gold standard of medical care. The quality of healthcare will be improved without saving direct costs. However, indirect costs such as time and effort for the patient and the citizen will be reduced.

No abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials have shown the efficacy of systemic treatments in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Clinical outcomes in psoriasis patients under real-world conditions are less well understood. Objective: This study compared Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Dermatological Life Quality Index (DLQI) improvement in all psoriasis patients registered in the Swiss Dermatology Network for Targeted Therapies. We asked whether outcomes differed between 4 treatment strategies, namely biologic monotherapy versus conventional systemic monotherapy, versus combined biologic and conventional systemic drugs, and versus therapy adaptation (switching from one type to another). Methods: PASI and DLQI within 1 year after onset of systemic treatment, measured at 3, 6, and 12 months, were compared among the 4 groups using generalized linear mixed-effects models. Results: Between March 2011 and December 2014, 334 patients were included; 151 received conventional systemic therapeutics, 145 biologics, 13 combined treatment, and 25 had a therapy adaptation. With regard to the absolute PASI, neither the biologic cohort nor the combined treatment cohort significantly differed from the conventional systemic therapeutics cohort. The odds of reaching PASI90 was significantly increased with combined therapy compared to conventional systemic therapeutics (p = 0.043) and decreased with a higher body mass index (p = 0.041). At visits 3 and 4, the PASI was generally lower than at visit 2 (visit 3 vs. visit 2, p = 0.0019; visit 4 vs. visit 2, p < 0.001). After 12 months, patients with biologic treatment had a significantly lower DLQI than those with conventional systemic therapeutics (p = 0.001). Conclusion: This study suggests that after 1 year of treatment, biologics are superior in improving the subjective disease burden compared to conventional systemic drugs.