Impact of Information Provided in Remote Case Discussions on Oral Medicine Teleconsultants' Diagnostic Impression.

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the impact of case descriptions, alongside clinical photographs, on telediagnosis accuracy in Oral Medicine.

Methods: An analytical cross-sectional observational study used 100 cases from Oral Medicine services at three universities. Three specialists in Oral Diagnosis remotely analyzed these cases. Simulated teleconsultations were presented via Google Forms, requesting: (a) diagnostic hypotheses based solely on clinical photographs; (b) identification of essential information for diagnosis; and (c) revised hypotheses after reviewing case descriptions. The specialists' opinions, with and without case descriptions, were compared to in-person diagnoses and categorized as: negative impact, maintenance of incorrect opinion, maintenance of correct opinion, and refinement of the response.

Results: Diagnostic accuracy based on images alone were 84%, 83%, and 75%. There was no statistically significant difference in accuracy before and after accessing case descriptions. Although these descriptions were not essential for a correct diagnosis, they contributed to refining diagnostic hypotheses in some cases. The most frequently requested information was the "duration of the condition" (84% of cases).

Conclusion: Experienced Oral Diagnosis specialists demonstrate satisfactory diagnostic accuracy when analyzing cases of oral lesions from a distance using photos, even when no clinical information is provided about the cases.