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

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

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.

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).

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.