{"title":"Attitudes of dermatological patients towards digital health interventions: a cross-sectional survey and cluster analysis","authors":"Patrick Reinders, Matthias Augustin, Marina Otten","doi":"10.1111/ddg.70010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to assess the acceptance of Germany's adoption of digital health interventions (DHI) among dermatology patientsand to identify patient clusters.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patients and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A cross-sectional, quantitative survey on acceptability and (future) usage of DHIs was conducted among patients with chronic dermatological conditions. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) identified key constructs and patients were grouped using a two-step clustering approach.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The EFA was conducted using data from 344 patients (mean age 52.5 years, SD 14.8; 74.0 % female) and identified four factors: “Acceptability of DHIs and Trust,” “Patients’ Digital Health Competencies,” “Digital Health Insecurities,” and “Positive Impact of DHIs.” Cluster analysis resulted in four groups: “Digital Sceptics” (n = 49, 15.6 %), “Cautious Adopters” (n = 106, 33.7 %), “Digital Enthusiasts” (n = 98, 31.1 %), “Adopters Unsure About Impact” (n = 62, 18.0 %). “Digital Enthusiasts” were significantly younger. Usage and acceptability varied among clusters, with “Digital Enthusiasts” and “Adopters Unsure About Impact” showing the highest rates. Overall, few patients used DHIs, including store-and-forward teledermatology (2.0 %–7.0 %) or electronic patient records (6.4 %–19.4 %).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Patient clusters with varying attitudes towards DHIs were identified. Despite a general willingness to adopt DHIs, actual usage remains low. Systemic barriers such as availability and digital competencies need to be addressed.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14758,"journal":{"name":"Journal Der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft","volume":"24 9","pages":"e1264-e1274"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ddg.70010","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal Der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddg.70010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to assess the acceptance of Germany's adoption of digital health interventions (DHI) among dermatology patientsand to identify patient clusters.
Patients and Methods
A cross-sectional, quantitative survey on acceptability and (future) usage of DHIs was conducted among patients with chronic dermatological conditions. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) identified key constructs and patients were grouped using a two-step clustering approach.
Results
The EFA was conducted using data from 344 patients (mean age 52.5 years, SD 14.8; 74.0 % female) and identified four factors: “Acceptability of DHIs and Trust,” “Patients’ Digital Health Competencies,” “Digital Health Insecurities,” and “Positive Impact of DHIs.” Cluster analysis resulted in four groups: “Digital Sceptics” (n = 49, 15.6 %), “Cautious Adopters” (n = 106, 33.7 %), “Digital Enthusiasts” (n = 98, 31.1 %), “Adopters Unsure About Impact” (n = 62, 18.0 %). “Digital Enthusiasts” were significantly younger. Usage and acceptability varied among clusters, with “Digital Enthusiasts” and “Adopters Unsure About Impact” showing the highest rates. Overall, few patients used DHIs, including store-and-forward teledermatology (2.0 %–7.0 %) or electronic patient records (6.4 %–19.4 %).
Conclusions
Patient clusters with varying attitudes towards DHIs were identified. Despite a general willingness to adopt DHIs, actual usage remains low. Systemic barriers such as availability and digital competencies need to be addressed.
期刊介绍:
The JDDG publishes scientific papers from a wide range of disciplines, such as dermatovenereology, allergology, phlebology, dermatosurgery, dermatooncology, and dermatohistopathology. Also in JDDG: information on medical training, continuing education, a calendar of events, book reviews and society announcements.
Papers can be submitted in German or English language. In the print version, all articles are published in German. In the online version, all key articles are published in English.