The Productivity Gains No One Talks About in the NHS
March 9, 2026
.svg)
October 28, 2026
Melanoma diagnoses in the UK have reached a record high. Cancer Research UK recorded 20,980 new cases in 2022 (the most recent verified figure) and projects that number will rise to 26,500 by 2040, a 23% increase in men and 26% in women. Meanwhile, dermatology remains one of the longest-waiting specialties in the NHS, with outpatient waits in some areas extending beyond a year.
Skin cancer caught early is highly treatable. Skin cancer caught late unfortunately is not. The referral pathway between a GP noticing something concerning and a dermatologist seeing the patient is where that difference is determined. Teledermatology (digital image-based triage of skin conditions) is the most effective tool available to accelerate that pathway.
In 2026, teledermatology is no longer an emerging technology. It is available, evidence-based, and already operating at scale in many NHS systems. The question for GPs and commissioners is not whether teledermatology works. It is how to implement it in a way that delivers the outcomes the evidence points to.
For GPs, teledermatology changes the referral process in a way that is straightforward once the pathway is established. Rather than writing a referral letter describing a skin lesion and sending the patient to an outpatient appointment, the GP captures high-quality images of the lesion at the point of consultation and submits them through a structured digital pathway alongside relevant clinical information.
The dermatologist reviews the images and clinical context remotely. In most cases, they can reach a triage decision without seeing the patient in person. The possible outcomes include discharging the patient with reassurance and GP-level management advice, redirecting the patient to an appropriate pathway such as a straight-to-treatment route, or booking an urgent or routine outpatient appointment where physical examination or biopsy is needed.
For the GP, this is faster and more informative than a standard referral. The response comes back quickly, rather than the patient waiting weeks for an appointment before any specialist has even looked at the case. And the response is specific to this patient's images and history, not a generic triage decision based on the referral letter alone.
Image quality matters. GPs using teledermatology pathways for the first time sometimes underestimate how much diagnostic value depends on the quality of the photographs submitted. Most pathways include guidance on image capture, and structured platforms can mandate the submission of adequately clear images before a case is accepted for review, which reduces the rate of requests for more information and speeds up the triage decision.
Speed is of the essence when redesigning clinical pathways. A&G cannot be an additional step and cause delays before patients are added to waiting lists. A Health Services Safety Investigation Body (HSSIB) report found numerous cases where patient harm occurred as a result of poorly managed and monitored A&G pathways. Therefore, although the concept and evidence of A&G can improve patient care, a poor choice of system or implementing A&G badly can negatively affect patient care.
That is why implementation and monitoring are built into how Cinapsis is deployed, not added afterwards. Every pathway is configured with clear response responsibilities and escalation routes, and trusts have visibility of activity and response times from day one.
Response times for image triage need to be defined and monitored. A pathway without a defined response time and an escalation mechanism for unanswered cases carries the same patient safety risks identified by HSSIB in its wider A&G safety review. A dermatology referral for suspected skin cancer that sits in a triage queue for three weeks is not better than a standard referral. It may be worse, because it creates the impression of clinical oversight without providing it.
For ICB commissioners, the evidence on teledermatology is strong enough to make a compelling case for investment. The two most relevant metrics are diversion rates — the proportion of referrals resolved without an outpatient appointment — and two-week-wait pathway performance.
In Gloucestershire, where Cinapsis supports the teledermatology pathway, 70% of dermatology referrals are now resolved without a face-to-face outpatient appointment. Every two-week-wait referral undergoes image triage before any appointment is booked, which means patients who need to be seen urgently are prioritised accurately, and patients whose lesions can be managed without a clinic attendance do not consume urgent appointment slots. Read the full teledermatology case study.
That 70% diversion rate has a direct effect on waiting times. Outpatient dermatology waiting lists grow because more patients are referred than clinics have capacity to see. When 70% of referrals are resolved before reaching an outpatient appointment, the pressure on that clinic capacity is substantially reduced. The patients who do need to be seen reach appointments faster, because the queue is shorter.
The two-week-wait pathway is where the patient safety case for teledermatology is clearest. A suspected skin cancer referral that is triaged by a dermatologist within 24 hours of the GP submitting images gives clinicians the information they need to prioritise accurately. A patient with a low-risk lesion is reassured promptly. A patient with a high-risk presentation is escalated immediately. The triage decision is based on what the dermatologist can actually see, rather than on the GP's written description of what they saw.
The evidence base for teledermatology on Cinapsis now spans numerous ICB regions, each with different pathway designs and starting points. The results are worth looking at in detail because they illustrate both the scale of what is achievable and the consistency of the pattern across different services.
In Black Country, the average wait for routine dermatology fell from six months to six weeks. In Gloucestershire, every two-week-wait referral was image-triaged before any appointment was booked, and 70% of dermatology referrals were managed without a face-to-face outpatient appointment. In Cheshire and Merseyside, 49% of cases were managed through advice and guidance alone, without a referral to secondary care.
In Frimley, working with Xyla, consultant dermatologists assess routine referrals remotely through a medical photography clinic. That model cut two-week-wait referrals sent to secondary care by 40% and managed 40% of all referrals in the community or by the GP.
The pathway in each of these systems works the same way. GPs or professional Medical Photography Services send images and clinical details securely to a consultant dermatologist through Cinapsis or eRS. Structured templates ensure the mandatory clinical information is captured before submission, which reduces the rate of requests for more information and speeds up the triage decision. The dermatologist either advises on management in primary care, books the patient into a clinic, or transfers the case to a neighbourhood health provider if the case warrants it. Two-week-wait referrals can be reviewed from images before any appointment is booked.
What varies between systems is not the model but the scale at which it operates and the configuration of the pathway to local service structures. Cinapsis teledermatology is currently used across seven ICB regions, and the results above reflect routine deployments rather than controlled pilots.
Get the full story in our latest case study.
Claire Jordan was diagnosed with malignant melanoma in 2025 after her GP practice used Cinapsis to send images of a changing mole directly to the dermatology team at Leighton Hospital. She received a same-day referral and had the mole removed within two weeks. Because it was caught early, surgery was all she needed.
Claire has since spoken publicly about her experience, including on BBC Radio 5 Live Drive, and now serves as patient representative for the Cheshire and Merseyside Cancer Alliance. Her case illustrates what the statistics describe: the difference between a mole reviewed by a dermatologist on the day it was photographed and a mole that enters a standard referral queue is not an administrative difference. It is a clinical one.
For patients waiting on a two-week-wait pathway, the period between referral and outcome is stressful. Teledermatology platforms that include direct patient notification — informing the patient when their images have been reviewed and what the outcome is — reduce that period of uncertainty without adding clinical workload. The patient experience of a referral pathway matters in dermatology as much as anywhere else, and teledermatology at its best makes it substantially better.
A teledermatology pathway is not just a technology deployment. The clinical governance around it matters as much as the platform. Specifically:
Image triage should be mandatory for all two-week-wait dermatology referrals before any outpatient appointment is booked. This is consistent with NHS England guidance and consistent with the evidence that triage before appointment produces better clinical outcomes than triage at the point of the appointment.
Outcome tracking at specialty level should also be part of every commissioner's reporting framework. The proportion of referrals resolved without an outpatient appointment, the proportion escalated on the two-week-wait pathway, and the average triage response time are the three metrics that tell commissioners whether the teledermatology pathway is working. Without them, it is impossible to know whether the investment is delivering.
Dermatology is one of the most capacity-constrained specialties in the NHS. The consultant dermatologist workforce has not kept pace with demand, and training pipeline constraints mean that gap will not close quickly. Teledermatology cannot create more dermatologists. What it can do is ensure that every dermatologist's time is spent on the patients and cases that genuinely require their expertise, rather than on outpatient appointments for patients whose presentations could have been resolved remotely.
In 2026, an ICB without a functioning teledermatology pathway is making an active choice to manage dermatology demand less efficiently than the evidence says it can be managed. The tools exist. The evidence exists. The question for commissioners is when, not whether.
To find out how Cinapsis supports teledermatology pathways, get in touch with our team or read the Liverpool teledermatology case study.
.svg)
