Trends in the use of cameras and computer technology among dermatologists in New York City 2001-2002

Noah S. Scheinfeld*, Kelly Flanigan, Mark Moshiyakhov, Jeffrey M. Weinberg, Dan Siegel, Murad Alam

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

25 Scopus citations


BACKGROUND. Photography and computers can enhance dermatologic visit documentation and care. OBJECTIVE. To determine dermatologists' use of cameras and computers. METHODS. We surveyed computer and camera use during the Dermatologic Society of Greater New York's meetings in January 2001 and 2002. RESULTS. Approximately 75% of dermatologists can use computers. Between 2001 and 2002, 35-mm film camera use by attending and resident dermatologists fell from 60% to 47% and 43% to 32%, respectively, and digital camera increased from 25% to 38% and 35% to 59%, respectively. Approximately 50% of dermatologists use instant cameras. Approximately 15 % of dermatologists use no camera. Most find images useful; however, medical dermatologists usually image only interesting patients, and dermatologic surgeons image almost all patients. Approximately 15% of dermatologist used electronic medical records (EMRs). CONCLUSION. Computers and cameras are widely used but have not changed dermatologic practice. Images are not used to track skin disease or integrated with EMRs nor are EMRs widely used, probably because of difficulty of use and limited computer literacy. Where images appear to add value, for example, for preoperative and postoperative documentation among dermatologic surgeons, camera use is common, suggesting that utility drives technology adoption.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)822-826
Number of pages5
JournalDermatologic Surgery
Issue number8
StatePublished - Aug 1 2003

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology
  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Trends in the use of cameras and computer technology among dermatologists in New York City 2001-2002'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this