Track: Clinical Studies

Abstract:

Digital pathology, which enables remote consultations and sets a foundation for artificial intelligence-assisted analysis, is becoming more widely adopted, but some concerns include speed, accuracy, and ease of use. This study aimed to develop improved workflows for digital dermatopathology by determining the difference in speed and accuracy of diagnosis when interpreting digitized dermatopathology slides using touchscreen versus traditional computer monitors. Two sets of forty diagnosis-matched digitized slides with common inflammatory and neoplastic dermatologic pathologies were included. Participants (n=6) included board-certified pathologists and dermatology residents. The order of the interpretation methods (touchscreen versus traditional) was randomly assigned, and time spent per slide and accuracy of diagnosis were recorded. A linear mixed-effects model compared the time spent per slide between the two methods and analyzed for superiority. Controlling for participant and diagnosis, interpretation time using the touchscreen monitor was 5.68 seconds (95% CI: 0.16 – 11.21) faster than with a traditional monitor. There was no significant difference in accuracy between the two methods (t = 1.51, p = 0.095). Although limited by a small number of participants, this study shows that a touchscreen monitor may provide a faster method for the interpretation of digitized slides and emphasizes the importance of improving workflows for digital pathology.

Marin Melloy

Affiliation

Refine Results

(428) Impact of Touchscreen Versus Traditional Computer Monitor on Speed and Accuracy in Interpreting Dermatopathology Specimens