Real-time teleophthalmology versus face-to-face consultation: A systematic review

Abstract

Introduction Advances in imaging capabilities and the evolution of real-time teleophthalmology have the potential to provide increased coverage to areas with limited ophthalmology services. However, there is limited research assessing the diagnostic accuracy of face-to-face teleophthalmology consultation. This systematic review aims to determine if real-time teleophthalmology provides comparable accuracy to face-to-face consultation for the diagnosis of common eye health conditions. Methods A search of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Cochrane databases and manual citation review was conducted on 6 February and 7 April 2016. Included studies involved real-time telemedicine in the field of ophthalmology or optometry, and assessed diagnostic accuracy against gold-standard face-to-face consultation. The revised quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool assessed risk of bias. Results Twelve studies were included, with participants ranging from four to 89 years old. A broad number of conditions were assessed and include corneal and retinal pathologies, strabismus, oculoplastics and post-operative review. Quality assessment identified a high or unclear risk of bias in patient selection (75%) due to an undisclosed recruitment processes. The index test showed high risk of bias in the included studies, due to the varied interpretation and conduct of real-time teleophthalmology methods. Reference standard risk was overall low (75%), as was the risk due to flow and timing (75%). Conclusion In terms of diagnostic accuracy, real-time teleophthalmology was considered superior to face-to-face consultation in one study and comparable in six studies. Store-and-forward image transmission coupled with real-time videoconferencing is a suitable alternative to overcome poor internet transmission speeds.

Telediagnosis of oral lesions in primary care: The EstomatoNet Program

“…In relation to the diagnostic process, face-to-face consultations are considered the gold standard (Moreno-Ramirez et al, 2007;Tan, Dobson, Bartnik, Muir, & Turner, 2016). There is no doubt that the evaluation made by the specialized oral medicine teleconsultant is influenced by the information offered by the applicant.…”

The Importance of Telemedicine during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Focus on Diabetic Retinopathy

“…As briefly mentioned before, among chronic diseases, diabetes, alongside its diverse complications, renders patients at high risk of poor prognosis [ 28 , 29 ]. Over the years, telemedicine has been proven as a useful tool to allow for periodic management of glycemic levels [ 30 ]. Telemedicine has been further implemented to gain an effective screening of complications without requiring mandatory on-site visits.…”

Cost-effectiveness of diabetic retinopathy screening programs using telemedicine: a systematic review

“…Teleophthalmology can produce the same clinical outcomes as the traditional face to face examination [17]. Tan et al [18] published a systematic review of teleophthalmology diagnostic accuracy compared with face to face consultation and found that teleophthalmology was considered superior to face to face consultation in one study and comparable in six studies. Surendran et al [19] demonstrated that overall, the published medical literature agrees that teleophthalmology programs are accurate and safe alternatives to the traditional DR screening.…”