Article

Rural dermatology is not as simple as it seems. For some, it means being the only dermatologist in a county where patients drive 3 hours for an appointment; for others, it means practicing in a mid-sized town and serving as both community doctor and regional referral point. Too often, rural dermatology is dismissed as isolating or career limiting, but the truth is very different. Rural dermatologists see plenty of common conditions such as acne and eczema, but they also see complex inflammatory diseases and advanced skin cancers that reflect delays in care for patients living in rural communities in the United States. Careers in rural dermatology can be flexible and creative, ranging from private practice to hospital employment to hybrid models that blend community and academic life.

The myths persist: You will lack colleagues. Your practice will be thin. You must sacrifice academic engagement. In reality, rural practice offers variety, leadership opportunities, and the chance to influence the health of entire communities in profound ways. In this article, we aim to unpack what rural dermatology actually looks like as a potential career path for residents, with a focus on private-academic hybrid and hospital-based practice models.

What Does Rural Really Mean?

Definitions of the term rural vary. For the US Census Bureau, it is synonymous with nonurban, and for the Office of Management and Budget, the term ­nonmetropolitan is preferred. The US Department of Agriculture’s ­Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes recognize a continuum of classifications from micropolitan to remote. In practice, the term rural covers a wide spectrum: the rolling farmlands of the Midwest, the mountains of Montana, the bayous of the South, the Native American reservations in New Mexico, and everything in between. It is not one uniform reality—rural America is diverse, resilient, and deeply connected.

A Day in Rural Practice

Daily clinic flow may look familiar: a full schedule, a mix of new and established patients, and frequent simple procedures such as biopsies and corticosteroid injections. But the scope of practice is wider. You become the dermatologist for hundreds of miles in every direction, managing most conditions locally while referring select cases to subspecialty centers.

Case variety is striking. Neglected tumors, unusual inflammatory presentations, pediatric conditions, and occupational dermatoses/injuries appear alongside the routine. Each day requires flexibility, judgment, confidence, and the ability to think outside the box. You must consider how a patient’s seasonal work, such as ranching or farming, and/or their total commute time impacts the risk-benefit discussion around treatment recommendations.

Matthew P. Shaffer, MD (Salina, Kansas), who has practiced rural dermatology for more than 20 years, explained that the breadth of dermatologic cases in which he served as the expert was both exciting and intimidating, but it became clear that this was the right professional path for him (email communication, September 5, 2025). In small communities, your role extends beyond the clinic walls. You will see patients at the grocery store, the library, and school events. That continuity fosters loyalty and accountability in ways that are hard to quantify.

Hybrid Partnerships and Hospital-Based Practice

Many practice structures exist: independent clinics, multispecialty groups, hospital employment, and increasingly, hybrid partnerships with academic centers.

Academic institutions have recognized the importance of rural exposure, and many now collaborate with rural dermatologists. For example, Heartland Dermatology in Salina, Kansas, where 2 of the authors (B.R.L. and T.G.) practice, partners with St. Louis University in Missouri to provide a residency track and rotations in rural clinics.

Rural-based hospital systems can create similar structures. Monument Health Dermatology in Spearfish, South Dakota, is integrated into the fabric of the community’s larger rural health care model. The physician (M.E.L.) collaborates daily with primary care providers, surgeons, and oncologists through a shared electronic health record (sometimes even through telephone speed-dial given the close collegiality of small-town providers). Patients come from across 4 states, some driving 6 hours each way. Patients who once doubted whether dermatology was worth the trip will consistently return for follow-up care once trust is earned. The stability of hospital employment supports volunteer faculty positions and a free satellite clinic in partnership with a local Lakota Tribal health center. There is never a dull day: the providers see urgent add-ons daily, which keeps them on their toes but in exchange brings immense reward. This includes a recent case from rural Wyoming: a complex mixed infantile hemangioma on the mid face just entering the rapid proliferation phase. Propranolol was started immediately, as opposed to months later when it was too late—a common complication for the majority of rural patients by the time to get to a dermatologist.

The Hub-and-Spoke Model

Complex cases can overwhelm rural practices, and this is when the hub-and-spoke model is invaluable. Dermatologists embed in local communities as spokes, while subspecialty services such as pediatric dermatology, dermatopathology, or Mohs micrographic surgery remain centralized at hubs. The hubs can be but do not have to be academic institutions; for Heartland Dermatology in Kansas, private practices fulfill both hub and spoke roles. With that said, 10 states do not have academic dermatology programs.¹ Mohs surgeons and pediatric dermatologists still can establish robust and successful independent rural subspecialty practices outside academic hubs. Christopher Gasbarre, DO (Spearfish, South Dakota), a board-certified, fellowship-trained Mohs surgeon in rural practice, advises residents to be confident in their abilities and to trust their training, noting that they often will be asked to manage complicated cases because of patient travel and cost constraints; however, clinicians should recognize their own limitations and those of nearby specialists and develop a referral network for cases that require multidisciplinary care (text communication, September 14, 2025).

The hub-and-spoke models—whether they entail an academic center as the hub with private practices as the spokes, or a network of private practices that include rural subspecialists—allows rural dermatologists to remain trusted local experts while ensuring that patients can access advanced care via a more streamlined referral process/network. The challenge is triage: what can be managed locally and what must patients travel for? As Dr. Shaffer explained, decisions about whether care is managed locally or referred to a hub often depend on the experience and comfort level of both the physician and the patient (email communication, September 5, 2025). Ultimately, continuity and trust are central. Patients rely on their local dermatologist to guide these decisions, and that guidance makes the model effective.

Finding the Right Fit

The idea that rural practice means being stuck in a small solo clinic is outdated. Multiple pathways exist, each with strengths and challenges. Independent private practice offers maximum autonomy and deep community integration, though financial and staffing risks are yours to manage. Hospital employment with outreach clinics provides stability, benefits, and collegiality, but bureaucracy can limit innovation and efficiency. Private equity platforms supply resources and rapid growth, but alignment with mission and autonomy must be weighed carefully. Hybrid joint ventures with hospitals combine private control and institutional support, but contracts can be complex. Locum tenens–to-permanent arrangements let you try rural life with minimal commitment, but continuity with patients may be sacrificed. A self-screener can clarify your path: How much autonomy do I want? Do I prefer predictability or variety? How important are procedures, teaching, or community roles? Answer these questions honestly and pair that insight with mentor guidance.

Getting Started: A 90-Day Outline

Launching a rural dermatology clinic is equal parts vision and structure. A focused 90-day plan can make the difference between a smooth opening and early frustration. Think in 4 domains: site selection, employment and licensing, credentialing and contracting, and operations. Even in a compressed timeline, dozens of small but crucial tasks may surface. There are resources—such as the Medical Group Management Association’s practice start-up checklist—that can provide a roadmap, ensuring no detail is overlooked as you transform a vision into a functioning clinic.²

Site Selection—First, determine whether you are opening a new standalone clinic, extending an existing practice, or creating a part-time satellite. Referral mapping with local primary care providers is essential, as is a scan of payer mix and dermatologist density in the region to ensure sustainability.

Employment and Licensing—Confirm state licensure and Drug Enforcement Administration registration and initiate hospital privileges early. These processes can stretch across the entire 90-day window, so starting immediately is critical.

Credentialing and Contracting—Applications with commercial and federal payers, along with Council for Affordable Quality Healthcare updates, often consume weeks if not months. If you plan to perform office microscopy or establish a dermatopathology laboratory, begin the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments certification process in parallel.

Operations—Once the regulatory wheels are in motion, shift to building your practice infrastructure. Secure space, weigh lease vs purchase, and consider partnerships with local hospitals for shared clinic facilities. Recruit staff with dermatology-specific skills such as clinical photography and biopsy assistance. Implement an electronic health record, set up payroll and malpractice insurance, and establish supply chains for everything from liquid nitrogen to surgical trays. Decide whether revenue cycle management will be in-house or outsourced and finalize dermatopathology workflows including courier and transport agreements.

Compensation and Career Sustainability

Compensation in rural dermatology mirrors that of other clinical settings: base salary with productivity bonuses, revenue pooling, or relative value unit structures. Financial planning is crucial. Develop a pro forma that models patient volume, expenses, and realistic growth. Risks exist, including payer mix, staffing, and competition, but the demand for care in underserved areas often offsets these, and communities may support practices with reduced overhead and strong loyalty. Hospital systems may add stipends for supervising advanced practitioners or outreach travel. Loan repayment programs, tax credits, and grants can further enhance packages. Consider checking with the state’s Office of Rural Health.

Career sustainability ultimately depends on more than finances. Geography, amenities, schedule flexibility, autonomy in medical decision-making, work-life balance, the value of being part of and serving a community, and other personal values will shape your “best-fit” practice model. Ask whether you can envision yourself thriving in the community you would be serving.

Broader Efforts and Community

No one builds a rural dermatology practice alone. That is why one of the authors (M.E.L.) created the Rural Access to Dermatology Society (https://www.radsociety.org/), a nonprofit organization connecting dermatologists, residents, and medical students with a shared mission. The organization supports residents through scholarships, mentorship, and telementoring. Faculty can contribute through advocacy, residency track development, and outreach to uniquely underserved rural populations such as Native American reservations where access to dermatology care remains severely limited. Joining can be as simple as attending a webinar, finding a mentor, or volunteering at a free clinic. You do not need to launch your own clinic to get involved; you can begin by connecting with a network already laying the foundation.

Teledermatology and Academic Tracks

Teledermatology and academic initiatives enhance rural care but do not replace in-person practice. Store-and-forward consultations extend reach but cannot match the continuity and trust of long-term patient relationships. Academic rural tracks prepare residents for unique challenges, but someone must staff the clinics. Private and hybrid models remain the backbone of rural access, where dermatologists take on the responsibility and the joy of being the local expert.

Final Thoughts

At its heart, rural dermatology is about trust and presence. Patients will share stories of delayed care, of driving hours for an appointment, of feeling invisible in the health care system. When you choose this path, you are not just filling a workforce gap, you are changing trajectories of lives, families, and communities. The rewards are not easily measured in relative value units or contracts; they show up in the loyalty of patients who return year after year, in the gratitude of families who no longer have to travel to “the big city,” and in the satisfaction of building something bigger than yourself. As Dr. Shaffer noted, he views success primarily in relational terms, reflected in long-term patient trust and continuity of care, particularly when individuals with serious conditions return over many years and entrust him with their ongoing management (email communication, September 5, 2025).

So here’s the invitation: bring one question to your mentor about rural practice and identify one rural site you could visit. The road less traveled in dermatology is closer than you think—and it might just be your path.

Rural dermatology is not as simple as it seems. For some, it means being the only dermatologist in a county where patients drive 3 hours for an appointment; for others, it means practicing in a mid-sized town and serving as both community doctor and regional referral point. Too often, rural dermatology is dismissed as isolating or career limiting, but the truth is very different. Rural dermatologists see plenty of common conditions such as acne and eczema, but they also see complex inflammatory diseases and advanced skin cancers that reflect delays in care for patients living in rural communities in the United States. Careers in rural dermatology can be flexible and creative, ranging from private practice to hospital employment to hybrid models that blend community and academic life.

The myths persist: You will lack colleagues. Your practice will be thin. You must sacrifice academic engagement. In reality, rural practice offers variety, leadership opportunities, and the chance to influence the health of entire communities in profound ways. In this article, we aim to unpack what rural dermatology actually looks like as a potential career path for residents, with a focus on private-academic hybrid and hospital-based practice models.

What Does Rural Really Mean?

Definitions of the term rural vary. For the US Census Bureau, it is synonymous with nonurban, and for the Office of Management and Budget, the term ­nonmetropolitan is preferred. The US Department of Agriculture’s ­Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes recognize a continuum of classifications from micropolitan to remote. In practice, the term rural covers a wide spectrum: the rolling farmlands of the Midwest, the mountains of Montana, the bayous of the South, the Native American reservations in New Mexico, and everything in between. It is not one uniform reality—rural America is diverse, resilient, and deeply connected.

A Day in Rural Practice

Daily clinic flow may look familiar: a full schedule, a mix of new and established patients, and frequent simple procedures such as biopsies and corticosteroid injections. But the scope of practice is wider. You become the dermatologist for hundreds of miles in every direction, managing most conditions locally while referring select cases to subspecialty centers.

Case variety is striking. Neglected tumors, unusual inflammatory presentations, pediatric conditions, and occupational dermatoses/injuries appear alongside the routine. Each day requires flexibility, judgment, confidence, and the ability to think outside the box. You must consider how a patient’s seasonal work, such as ranching or farming, and/or their total commute time impacts the risk-benefit discussion around treatment recommendations.

Matthew P. Shaffer, MD (Salina, Kansas), who has practiced rural dermatology for more than 20 years, explained that the breadth of dermatologic cases in which he served as the expert was both exciting and intimidating, but it became clear that this was the right professional path for him (email communication, September 5, 2025). In small communities, your role extends beyond the clinic walls. You will see patients at the grocery store, the library, and school events. That continuity fosters loyalty and accountability in ways that are hard to quantify.

Hybrid Partnerships and Hospital-Based Practice

Many practice structures exist: independent clinics, multispecialty groups, hospital employment, and increasingly, hybrid partnerships with academic centers.

Academic institutions have recognized the importance of rural exposure, and many now collaborate with rural dermatologists. For example, Heartland Dermatology in Salina, Kansas, where 2 of the authors (B.R.L. and T.G.) practice, partners with St. Louis University in Missouri to provide a residency track and rotations in rural clinics.

Rural-based hospital systems can create similar structures. Monument Health Dermatology in Spearfish, South Dakota, is integrated into the fabric of the community’s larger rural health care model. The physician (M.E.L.) collaborates daily with primary care providers, surgeons, and oncologists through a shared electronic health record (sometimes even through telephone speed-dial given the close collegiality of small-town providers). Patients come from across 4 states, some driving 6 hours each way. Patients who once doubted whether dermatology was worth the trip will consistently return for follow-up care once trust is earned. The stability of hospital employment supports volunteer faculty positions and a free satellite clinic in partnership with a local Lakota Tribal health center. There is never a dull day: the providers see urgent add-ons daily, which keeps them on their toes but in exchange brings immense reward. This includes a recent case from rural Wyoming: a complex mixed infantile hemangioma on the mid face just entering the rapid proliferation phase. Propranolol was started immediately, as opposed to months later when it was too late—a common complication for the majority of rural patients by the time to get to a dermatologist.

The Hub-and-Spoke Model

Complex cases can overwhelm rural practices, and this is when the hub-and-spoke model is invaluable. Dermatologists embed in local communities as spokes, while subspecialty services such as pediatric dermatology, dermatopathology, or Mohs micrographic surgery remain centralized at hubs. The hubs can be but do not have to be academic institutions; for Heartland Dermatology in Kansas, private practices fulfill both hub and spoke roles. With that said, 10 states do not have academic dermatology programs.¹ Mohs surgeons and pediatric dermatologists still can establish robust and successful independent rural subspecialty practices outside academic hubs. Christopher Gasbarre, DO (Spearfish, South Dakota), a board-certified, fellowship-trained Mohs surgeon in rural practice, advises residents to be confident in their abilities and to trust their training, noting that they often will be asked to manage complicated cases because of patient travel and cost constraints; however, clinicians should recognize their own limitations and those of nearby specialists and develop a referral network for cases that require multidisciplinary care (text communication, September 14, 2025).

The hub-and-spoke models—whether they entail an academic center as the hub with private practices as the spokes, or a network of private practices that include rural subspecialists—allows rural dermatologists to remain trusted local experts while ensuring that patients can access advanced care via a more streamlined referral process/network. The challenge is triage: what can be managed locally and what must patients travel for? As Dr. Shaffer explained, decisions about whether care is managed locally or referred to a hub often depend on the experience and comfort level of both the physician and the patient (email communication, September 5, 2025). Ultimately, continuity and trust are central. Patients rely on their local dermatologist to guide these decisions, and that guidance makes the model effective.

Finding the Right Fit

The idea that rural practice means being stuck in a small solo clinic is outdated. Multiple pathways exist, each with strengths and challenges. Independent private practice offers maximum autonomy and deep community integration, though financial and staffing risks are yours to manage. Hospital employment with outreach clinics provides stability, benefits, and collegiality, but bureaucracy can limit innovation and efficiency. Private equity platforms supply resources and rapid growth, but alignment with mission and autonomy must be weighed carefully. Hybrid joint ventures with hospitals combine private control and institutional support, but contracts can be complex. Locum tenens–to-permanent arrangements let you try rural life with minimal commitment, but continuity with patients may be sacrificed. A self-screener can clarify your path: How much autonomy do I want? Do I prefer predictability or variety? How important are procedures, teaching, or community roles? Answer these questions honestly and pair that insight with mentor guidance.

Getting Started: A 90-Day Outline

Launching a rural dermatology clinic is equal parts vision and structure. A focused 90-day plan can make the difference between a smooth opening and early frustration. Think in 4 domains: site selection, employment and licensing, credentialing and contracting, and operations. Even in a compressed timeline, dozens of small but crucial tasks may surface. There are resources—such as the Medical Group Management Association’s practice start-up checklist—that can provide a roadmap, ensuring no detail is overlooked as you transform a vision into a functioning clinic.²

Site Selection—First, determine whether you are opening a new standalone clinic, extending an existing practice, or creating a part-time satellite. Referral mapping with local primary care providers is essential, as is a scan of payer mix and dermatologist density in the region to ensure sustainability.

Employment and Licensing—Confirm state licensure and Drug Enforcement Administration registration and initiate hospital privileges early. These processes can stretch across the entire 90-day window, so starting immediately is critical.

Credentialing and Contracting—Applications with commercial and federal payers, along with Council for Affordable Quality Healthcare updates, often consume weeks if not months. If you plan to perform office microscopy or establish a dermatopathology laboratory, begin the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments certification process in parallel.

Operations—Once the regulatory wheels are in motion, shift to building your practice infrastructure. Secure space, weigh lease vs purchase, and consider partnerships with local hospitals for shared clinic facilities. Recruit staff with dermatology-specific skills such as clinical photography and biopsy assistance. Implement an electronic health record, set up payroll and malpractice insurance, and establish supply chains for everything from liquid nitrogen to surgical trays. Decide whether revenue cycle management will be in-house or outsourced and finalize dermatopathology workflows including courier and transport agreements.

Compensation and Career Sustainability

Compensation in rural dermatology mirrors that of other clinical settings: base salary with productivity bonuses, revenue pooling, or relative value unit structures. Financial planning is crucial. Develop a pro forma that models patient volume, expenses, and realistic growth. Risks exist, including payer mix, staffing, and competition, but the demand for care in underserved areas often offsets these, and communities may support practices with reduced overhead and strong loyalty. Hospital systems may add stipends for supervising advanced practitioners or outreach travel. Loan repayment programs, tax credits, and grants can further enhance packages. Consider checking with the state’s Office of Rural Health.

Career sustainability ultimately depends on more than finances. Geography, amenities, schedule flexibility, autonomy in medical decision-making, work-life balance, the value of being part of and serving a community, and other personal values will shape your “best-fit” practice model. Ask whether you can envision yourself thriving in the community you would be serving.

Broader Efforts and Community

No one builds a rural dermatology practice alone. That is why one of the authors (M.E.L.) created the Rural Access to Dermatology Society (https://www.radsociety.org/), a nonprofit organization connecting dermatologists, residents, and medical students with a shared mission. The organization supports residents through scholarships, mentorship, and telementoring. Faculty can contribute through advocacy, residency track development, and outreach to uniquely underserved rural populations such as Native American reservations where access to dermatology care remains severely limited. Joining can be as simple as attending a webinar, finding a mentor, or volunteering at a free clinic. You do not need to launch your own clinic to get involved; you can begin by connecting with a network already laying the foundation.

Teledermatology and Academic Tracks

Teledermatology and academic initiatives enhance rural care but do not replace in-person practice. Store-and-forward consultations extend reach but cannot match the continuity and trust of long-term patient relationships. Academic rural tracks prepare residents for unique challenges, but someone must staff the clinics. Private and hybrid models remain the backbone of rural access, where dermatologists take on the responsibility and the joy of being the local expert.

Final Thoughts

At its heart, rural dermatology is about trust and presence. Patients will share stories of delayed care, of driving hours for an appointment, of feeling invisible in the health care system. When you choose this path, you are not just filling a workforce gap, you are changing trajectories of lives, families, and communities. The rewards are not easily measured in relative value units or contracts; they show up in the loyalty of patients who return year after year, in the gratitude of families who no longer have to travel to “the big city,” and in the satisfaction of building something bigger than yourself. As Dr. Shaffer noted, he views success primarily in relational terms, reflected in long-term patient trust and continuity of care, particularly when individuals with serious conditions return over many years and entrust him with their ongoing management (email communication, September 5, 2025).

So here’s the invitation: bring one question to your mentor about rural practice and identify one rural site you could visit. The road less traveled in dermatology is closer than you think—and it might just be your path.

Rural dermatology is not as simple as it seems. For some, it means being the only dermatologist in a county where patients drive 3 hours for an appointment; for others, it means practicing in a mid-sized town and serving as both community doctor and regional referral point. Too often, rural dermatology is dismissed as isolating or career limiting, but the truth is very different. Rural dermatologists see plenty of common conditions such as acne and eczema, but they also see complex inflammatory diseases and advanced skin cancers that reflect delays in care for patients living in rural communities in the United States. Careers in rural dermatology can be flexible and creative, ranging from private practice to hospital employment to hybrid models that blend community and academic life.

The myths persist: You will lack colleagues. Your practice will be thin. You must sacrifice academic engagement. In reality, rural practice offers variety, leadership opportunities, and the chance to influence the health of entire communities in profound ways. In this article, we aim to unpack what rural dermatology actually looks like as a potential career path for residents, with a focus on private-academic hybrid and hospital-based practice models.

What Does Rural Really Mean?

Definitions of the term rural vary. For the US Census Bureau, it is synonymous with nonurban, and for the Office of Management and Budget, the term ­nonmetropolitan is preferred. The US Department of Agriculture’s ­Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes recognize a continuum of classifications from micropolitan to remote. In practice, the term rural covers a wide spectrum: the rolling farmlands of the Midwest, the mountains of Montana, the bayous of the South, the Native American reservations in New Mexico, and everything in between. It is not one uniform reality—rural America is diverse, resilient, and deeply connected.

A Day in Rural Practice

Daily clinic flow may look familiar: a full schedule, a mix of new and established patients, and frequent simple procedures such as biopsies and corticosteroid injections. But the scope of practice is wider. You become the dermatologist for hundreds of miles in every direction, managing most conditions locally while referring select cases to subspecialty centers.

Case variety is striking. Neglected tumors, unusual inflammatory presentations, pediatric conditions, and occupational dermatoses/injuries appear alongside the routine. Each day requires flexibility, judgment, confidence, and the ability to think outside the box. You must consider how a patient’s seasonal work, such as ranching or farming, and/or their total commute time impacts the risk-benefit discussion around treatment recommendations.

Matthew P. Shaffer, MD (Salina, Kansas), who has practiced rural dermatology for more than 20 years, explained that the breadth of dermatologic cases in which he served as the expert was both exciting and intimidating, but it became clear that this was the right professional path for him (email communication, September 5, 2025). In small communities, your role extends beyond the clinic walls. You will see patients at the grocery store, the library, and school events. That continuity fosters loyalty and accountability in ways that are hard to quantify.

Hybrid Partnerships and Hospital-Based Practice

Many practice structures exist: independent clinics, multispecialty groups, hospital employment, and increasingly, hybrid partnerships with academic centers.

Academic institutions have recognized the importance of rural exposure, and many now collaborate with rural dermatologists. For example, Heartland Dermatology in Salina, Kansas, where 2 of the authors (B.R.L. and T.G.) practice, partners with St. Louis University in Missouri to provide a residency track and rotations in rural clinics.

Rural-based hospital systems can create similar structures. Monument Health Dermatology in Spearfish, South Dakota, is integrated into the fabric of the community’s larger rural health care model. The physician (M.E.L.) collaborates daily with primary care providers, surgeons, and oncologists through a shared electronic health record (sometimes even through telephone speed-dial given the close collegiality of small-town providers). Patients come from across 4 states, some driving 6 hours each way. Patients who once doubted whether dermatology was worth the trip will consistently return for follow-up care once trust is earned. The stability of hospital employment supports volunteer faculty positions and a free satellite clinic in partnership with a local Lakota Tribal health center. There is never a dull day: the providers see urgent add-ons daily, which keeps them on their toes but in exchange brings immense reward. This includes a recent case from rural Wyoming: a complex mixed infantile hemangioma on the mid face just entering the rapid proliferation phase. Propranolol was started immediately, as opposed to months later when it was too late—a common complication for the majority of rural patients by the time to get to a dermatologist.

The Hub-and-Spoke Model

Complex cases can overwhelm rural practices, and this is when the hub-and-spoke model is invaluable. Dermatologists embed in local communities as spokes, while subspecialty services such as pediatric dermatology, dermatopathology, or Mohs micrographic surgery remain centralized at hubs. The hubs can be but do not have to be academic institutions; for Heartland Dermatology in Kansas, private practices fulfill both hub and spoke roles. With that said, 10 states do not have academic dermatology programs.¹ Mohs surgeons and pediatric dermatologists still can establish robust and successful independent rural subspecialty practices outside academic hubs. Christopher Gasbarre, DO (Spearfish, South Dakota), a board-certified, fellowship-trained Mohs surgeon in rural practice, advises residents to be confident in their abilities and to trust their training, noting that they often will be asked to manage complicated cases because of patient travel and cost constraints; however, clinicians should recognize their own limitations and those of nearby specialists and develop a referral network for cases that require multidisciplinary care (text communication, September 14, 2025).

The hub-and-spoke models—whether they entail an academic center as the hub with private practices as the spokes, or a network of private practices that include rural subspecialists—allows rural dermatologists to remain trusted local experts while ensuring that patients can access advanced care via a more streamlined referral process/network. The challenge is triage: what can be managed locally and what must patients travel for? As Dr. Shaffer explained, decisions about whether care is managed locally or referred to a hub often depend on the experience and comfort level of both the physician and the patient (email communication, September 5, 2025). Ultimately, continuity and trust are central. Patients rely on their local dermatologist to guide these decisions, and that guidance makes the model effective.

Finding the Right Fit

The idea that rural practice means being stuck in a small solo clinic is outdated. Multiple pathways exist, each with strengths and challenges. Independent private practice offers maximum autonomy and deep community integration, though financial and staffing risks are yours to manage. Hospital employment with outreach clinics provides stability, benefits, and collegiality, but bureaucracy can limit innovation and efficiency. Private equity platforms supply resources and rapid growth, but alignment with mission and autonomy must be weighed carefully. Hybrid joint ventures with hospitals combine private control and institutional support, but contracts can be complex. Locum tenens–to-permanent arrangements let you try rural life with minimal commitment, but continuity with patients may be sacrificed. A self-screener can clarify your path: How much autonomy do I want? Do I prefer predictability or variety? How important are procedures, teaching, or community roles? Answer these questions honestly and pair that insight with mentor guidance.

Getting Started: A 90-Day Outline

Launching a rural dermatology clinic is equal parts vision and structure. A focused 90-day plan can make the difference between a smooth opening and early frustration. Think in 4 domains: site selection, employment and licensing, credentialing and contracting, and operations. Even in a compressed timeline, dozens of small but crucial tasks may surface. There are resources—such as the Medical Group Management Association’s practice start-up checklist—that can provide a roadmap, ensuring no detail is overlooked as you transform a vision into a functioning clinic.²

Site Selection—First, determine whether you are opening a new standalone clinic, extending an existing practice, or creating a part-time satellite. Referral mapping with local primary care providers is essential, as is a scan of payer mix and dermatologist density in the region to ensure sustainability.

Employment and Licensing—Confirm state licensure and Drug Enforcement Administration registration and initiate hospital privileges early. These processes can stretch across the entire 90-day window, so starting immediately is critical.

Credentialing and Contracting—Applications with commercial and federal payers, along with Council for Affordable Quality Healthcare updates, often consume weeks if not months. If you plan to perform office microscopy or establish a dermatopathology laboratory, begin the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments certification process in parallel.

Operations—Once the regulatory wheels are in motion, shift to building your practice infrastructure. Secure space, weigh lease vs purchase, and consider partnerships with local hospitals for shared clinic facilities. Recruit staff with dermatology-specific skills such as clinical photography and biopsy assistance. Implement an electronic health record, set up payroll and malpractice insurance, and establish supply chains for everything from liquid nitrogen to surgical trays. Decide whether revenue cycle management will be in-house or outsourced and finalize dermatopathology workflows including courier and transport agreements.

Compensation and Career Sustainability

Compensation in rural dermatology mirrors that of other clinical settings: base salary with productivity bonuses, revenue pooling, or relative value unit structures. Financial planning is crucial. Develop a pro forma that models patient volume, expenses, and realistic growth. Risks exist, including payer mix, staffing, and competition, but the demand for care in underserved areas often offsets these, and communities may support practices with reduced overhead and strong loyalty. Hospital systems may add stipends for supervising advanced practitioners or outreach travel. Loan repayment programs, tax credits, and grants can further enhance packages. Consider checking with the state’s Office of Rural Health.

Career sustainability ultimately depends on more than finances. Geography, amenities, schedule flexibility, autonomy in medical decision-making, work-life balance, the value of being part of and serving a community, and other personal values will shape your “best-fit” practice model. Ask whether you can envision yourself thriving in the community you would be serving.

Broader Efforts and Community

No one builds a rural dermatology practice alone. That is why one of the authors (M.E.L.) created the Rural Access to Dermatology Society (https://www.radsociety.org/), a nonprofit organization connecting dermatologists, residents, and medical students with a shared mission. The organization supports residents through scholarships, mentorship, and telementoring. Faculty can contribute through advocacy, residency track development, and outreach to uniquely underserved rural populations such as Native American reservations where access to dermatology care remains severely limited. Joining can be as simple as attending a webinar, finding a mentor, or volunteering at a free clinic. You do not need to launch your own clinic to get involved; you can begin by connecting with a network already laying the foundation.

Teledermatology and Academic Tracks

Teledermatology and academic initiatives enhance rural care but do not replace in-person practice. Store-and-forward consultations extend reach but cannot match the continuity and trust of long-term patient relationships. Academic rural tracks prepare residents for unique challenges, but someone must staff the clinics. Private and hybrid models remain the backbone of rural access, where dermatologists take on the responsibility and the joy of being the local expert.

Final Thoughts

At its heart, rural dermatology is about trust and presence. Patients will share stories of delayed care, of driving hours for an appointment, of feeling invisible in the health care system. When you choose this path, you are not just filling a workforce gap, you are changing trajectories of lives, families, and communities. The rewards are not easily measured in relative value units or contracts; they show up in the loyalty of patients who return year after year, in the gratitude of families who no longer have to travel to “the big city,” and in the satisfaction of building something bigger than yourself. As Dr. Shaffer noted, he views success primarily in relational terms, reflected in long-term patient trust and continuity of care, particularly when individuals with serious conditions return over many years and entrust him with their ongoing management (email communication, September 5, 2025).

So here’s the invitation: bring one question to your mentor about rural practice and identify one rural site you could visit. The road less traveled in dermatology is closer than you think—and it might just be your path.

The Diagnosis: Fibroelastolytic Papulosis

Histopathology demonstrated decreased density and fragmentation of elastic fibers in the superficial reticular and papillary dermis consistent with an elastolytic disease process (Figure). Of note, elastolysis typically is visualized with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain but cannot be visualized well with standard hematoxylin and eosin staining. Additional staining with Congo red was negative for amyloid, and colloidal iron did not show any increase in dermal mucin, ruling out amyloidosis and scleromyxedema, respectively. Based on the histopathologic findings and the clinical history, a diagnosis of fibroelastolytic papulosis (FP) was made. Given the benign nature of the condition, the patient was prescribed a topical steroid (clobetasol 0.05%) for symptomatic relief. 

Cutaneous conditions can arise from abnormalities in the elastin composition of connective tissue due to abnormal elastin formation or degradation (elastolysis).¹ Fibroelastolytic papulosis is a distinct elastolytic disorder diagnosed histologically by a notable loss of elastic fibers localized to the papillary dermis.² Fibroelastolytic papulosis is an acquired condition linked to exposure to UV radiation, abnormal elastogenesis, and hormonal factors that commonly involves the neck, supraclavicular area, and upper back.^1-3 Predominantly affecting elderly women, FP is characterized by soft white papules that often coalesce into a cobblestonelike plaque.² Because the condition rarely is seen in men, there is speculation that it may involve genetic, hereditary, and hormonal factors that have yet to be identified.¹ 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be classified as either pseudoxanthoma elasticum–like papillary dermal elastolysis or white fibrous papulosis.^2,3 White fibrous papulosis manifests with haphazardly arranged collagen fibers in the reticular and deep dermis with papillary dermal elastolysis and most commonly develops on the neck.³ Although our patient’s lesion was on the neck, the absence of thickened collagen bands on histology supported classification as the pseudoxanthoma elasticum– like papillary dermal elastolysis subtype. 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be distinguished from other elastic abnormalities by its characteristic clinical appearance, demographic distribution, and associated histopathologic findings. The differential diagnosis of FP includes pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE), anetoderma, scleromyxedema, and lichen amyloidosis. 

Pseudoxanthoma elasticum is a hereditary or acquired multisystem disease characterized by fragmentation and calcification of elastic fibers in the mid dermis.^1,4 Its clinical presentation resembles that of FP, appearing as small, asymptomatic, yellowish or flesh-colored papules in a reticular pattern that progressively coalesce into larger plaques with a cobblestonelike appearance.1 Like FP, PXE commonly affects the flexural creases in women but in contrast may manifest earlier (ie, second or third decades of life). Additionally, the pathogenesis of PXE is not related to UV radiation exposure. The hereditary form develops due to a gene variation, whereas the acquired form may be due to conditions associated with physiologic and/or mechanical stress.¹ 

Anetoderma, also known as macular atrophy, is another condition that demonstrates elastic tissue loss in the dermis on histopathology.¹ Anetoderma commonly is seen in younger patients and can be differentiated from FP by the antecedent presence of an inflammatory process. Anetoderma is classified as primary or secondary. Primary anetoderma is associated with prothrombotic abnormalities, while secondary anetoderma is associated with systemic disease including but not limited to sarcoidosis, systemic lupus erythematous, and Graves disease.¹

Neither lichen myxedematosus (LM) nor lichen amyloidosis (LA) are true elastolytic conditions. Lichen myxedematosus is considered in the differential diagnosis of FP due to the associated loss of elastin observed with disease progression. An idiopathic cutaneous mucinosis, LM is a localized form of scleromyxedema, which is characterized by small, firm, waxy papules; mucin deposition in the skin; fibroblast proliferation; and fibrosis. On histologic analysis, typical findings of LM include irregularly arranged fibroblasts, diffuse mucin deposition within the upper and mid reticular dermis, increased collagen deposition, and a decrease in elastin fibers.⁵ 

Lichen amyloidosis is a subtype of primary localized cutaneous amyloidosis, a rare condition characterized by the extracellular deposition of amyloid proteins in the skin and a lack of systemic involvement. Although it is not an elastolytic condition, LA is clinically similar to FP, often manifesting as multiple localized, pruritic, hyperpigmented papules that can coalesce into larger plaques; it tends to develop on the shins, calves, ankles, and thighs.^6,7 The condition commonly manifests in the fifth and sixth decades of life; however, in contrast to FP, LA is more prevalent in men and individuals from Central and South American as well as Middle Eastern and non-Chinese Asian populations.⁸ Lichen amyloidosis is a keratin-derived amyloidosis with cytokeratin-based amyloid precursors that only deposit in the dermis.⁶ Histopathology reveals colloid bodies due to the presence of apoptotic basal keratinocytes. The etiology of LA is unknown, but on rare occasions it has been associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia 2A rearranged during transfection mutations.⁶ 

In summary, FP is an uncommonly diagnosed elastolytic condition that often is asymptomatic or associated with mild pruritus. Biopsy is warranted to help differentiate it from mimicker conditions that may be associated with systemic disease. Currently, there is no established therapy that provides successful treatment. Research suggests unsatisfactory results with the use of topical tretinoin or topical antioxidants.3 More recently, nonablative fractional resurfacing lasers have been evaluated as a possible therapeutic strategy of promise for elastic disorders.⁹

The Diagnosis: Fibroelastolytic Papulosis

Histopathology demonstrated decreased density and fragmentation of elastic fibers in the superficial reticular and papillary dermis consistent with an elastolytic disease process (Figure). Of note, elastolysis typically is visualized with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain but cannot be visualized well with standard hematoxylin and eosin staining. Additional staining with Congo red was negative for amyloid, and colloidal iron did not show any increase in dermal mucin, ruling out amyloidosis and scleromyxedema, respectively. Based on the histopathologic findings and the clinical history, a diagnosis of fibroelastolytic papulosis (FP) was made. Given the benign nature of the condition, the patient was prescribed a topical steroid (clobetasol 0.05%) for symptomatic relief. 

Cutaneous conditions can arise from abnormalities in the elastin composition of connective tissue due to abnormal elastin formation or degradation (elastolysis).¹ Fibroelastolytic papulosis is a distinct elastolytic disorder diagnosed histologically by a notable loss of elastic fibers localized to the papillary dermis.² Fibroelastolytic papulosis is an acquired condition linked to exposure to UV radiation, abnormal elastogenesis, and hormonal factors that commonly involves the neck, supraclavicular area, and upper back.^1-3 Predominantly affecting elderly women, FP is characterized by soft white papules that often coalesce into a cobblestonelike plaque.² Because the condition rarely is seen in men, there is speculation that it may involve genetic, hereditary, and hormonal factors that have yet to be identified.¹ 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be classified as either pseudoxanthoma elasticum–like papillary dermal elastolysis or white fibrous papulosis.^2,3 White fibrous papulosis manifests with haphazardly arranged collagen fibers in the reticular and deep dermis with papillary dermal elastolysis and most commonly develops on the neck.³ Although our patient’s lesion was on the neck, the absence of thickened collagen bands on histology supported classification as the pseudoxanthoma elasticum– like papillary dermal elastolysis subtype. 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be distinguished from other elastic abnormalities by its characteristic clinical appearance, demographic distribution, and associated histopathologic findings. The differential diagnosis of FP includes pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE), anetoderma, scleromyxedema, and lichen amyloidosis. 

Pseudoxanthoma elasticum is a hereditary or acquired multisystem disease characterized by fragmentation and calcification of elastic fibers in the mid dermis.^1,4 Its clinical presentation resembles that of FP, appearing as small, asymptomatic, yellowish or flesh-colored papules in a reticular pattern that progressively coalesce into larger plaques with a cobblestonelike appearance.1 Like FP, PXE commonly affects the flexural creases in women but in contrast may manifest earlier (ie, second or third decades of life). Additionally, the pathogenesis of PXE is not related to UV radiation exposure. The hereditary form develops due to a gene variation, whereas the acquired form may be due to conditions associated with physiologic and/or mechanical stress.¹ 

Anetoderma, also known as macular atrophy, is another condition that demonstrates elastic tissue loss in the dermis on histopathology.¹ Anetoderma commonly is seen in younger patients and can be differentiated from FP by the antecedent presence of an inflammatory process. Anetoderma is classified as primary or secondary. Primary anetoderma is associated with prothrombotic abnormalities, while secondary anetoderma is associated with systemic disease including but not limited to sarcoidosis, systemic lupus erythematous, and Graves disease.¹

Neither lichen myxedematosus (LM) nor lichen amyloidosis (LA) are true elastolytic conditions. Lichen myxedematosus is considered in the differential diagnosis of FP due to the associated loss of elastin observed with disease progression. An idiopathic cutaneous mucinosis, LM is a localized form of scleromyxedema, which is characterized by small, firm, waxy papules; mucin deposition in the skin; fibroblast proliferation; and fibrosis. On histologic analysis, typical findings of LM include irregularly arranged fibroblasts, diffuse mucin deposition within the upper and mid reticular dermis, increased collagen deposition, and a decrease in elastin fibers.⁵ 

Lichen amyloidosis is a subtype of primary localized cutaneous amyloidosis, a rare condition characterized by the extracellular deposition of amyloid proteins in the skin and a lack of systemic involvement. Although it is not an elastolytic condition, LA is clinically similar to FP, often manifesting as multiple localized, pruritic, hyperpigmented papules that can coalesce into larger plaques; it tends to develop on the shins, calves, ankles, and thighs.^6,7 The condition commonly manifests in the fifth and sixth decades of life; however, in contrast to FP, LA is more prevalent in men and individuals from Central and South American as well as Middle Eastern and non-Chinese Asian populations.⁸ Lichen amyloidosis is a keratin-derived amyloidosis with cytokeratin-based amyloid precursors that only deposit in the dermis.⁶ Histopathology reveals colloid bodies due to the presence of apoptotic basal keratinocytes. The etiology of LA is unknown, but on rare occasions it has been associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia 2A rearranged during transfection mutations.⁶ 

In summary, FP is an uncommonly diagnosed elastolytic condition that often is asymptomatic or associated with mild pruritus. Biopsy is warranted to help differentiate it from mimicker conditions that may be associated with systemic disease. Currently, there is no established therapy that provides successful treatment. Research suggests unsatisfactory results with the use of topical tretinoin or topical antioxidants.3 More recently, nonablative fractional resurfacing lasers have been evaluated as a possible therapeutic strategy of promise for elastic disorders.⁹

The Diagnosis: Fibroelastolytic Papulosis

Histopathology demonstrated decreased density and fragmentation of elastic fibers in the superficial reticular and papillary dermis consistent with an elastolytic disease process (Figure). Of note, elastolysis typically is visualized with Verhoeff-van Gieson stain but cannot be visualized well with standard hematoxylin and eosin staining. Additional staining with Congo red was negative for amyloid, and colloidal iron did not show any increase in dermal mucin, ruling out amyloidosis and scleromyxedema, respectively. Based on the histopathologic findings and the clinical history, a diagnosis of fibroelastolytic papulosis (FP) was made. Given the benign nature of the condition, the patient was prescribed a topical steroid (clobetasol 0.05%) for symptomatic relief. 

Cutaneous conditions can arise from abnormalities in the elastin composition of connective tissue due to abnormal elastin formation or degradation (elastolysis).¹ Fibroelastolytic papulosis is a distinct elastolytic disorder diagnosed histologically by a notable loss of elastic fibers localized to the papillary dermis.² Fibroelastolytic papulosis is an acquired condition linked to exposure to UV radiation, abnormal elastogenesis, and hormonal factors that commonly involves the neck, supraclavicular area, and upper back.^1-3 Predominantly affecting elderly women, FP is characterized by soft white papules that often coalesce into a cobblestonelike plaque.² Because the condition rarely is seen in men, there is speculation that it may involve genetic, hereditary, and hormonal factors that have yet to be identified.¹ 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be classified as either pseudoxanthoma elasticum–like papillary dermal elastolysis or white fibrous papulosis.^2,3 White fibrous papulosis manifests with haphazardly arranged collagen fibers in the reticular and deep dermis with papillary dermal elastolysis and most commonly develops on the neck.³ Although our patient’s lesion was on the neck, the absence of thickened collagen bands on histology supported classification as the pseudoxanthoma elasticum– like papillary dermal elastolysis subtype. 

Fibroelastolytic papulosis can be distinguished from other elastic abnormalities by its characteristic clinical appearance, demographic distribution, and associated histopathologic findings. The differential diagnosis of FP includes pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE), anetoderma, scleromyxedema, and lichen amyloidosis. 

Pseudoxanthoma elasticum is a hereditary or acquired multisystem disease characterized by fragmentation and calcification of elastic fibers in the mid dermis.^1,4 Its clinical presentation resembles that of FP, appearing as small, asymptomatic, yellowish or flesh-colored papules in a reticular pattern that progressively coalesce into larger plaques with a cobblestonelike appearance.1 Like FP, PXE commonly affects the flexural creases in women but in contrast may manifest earlier (ie, second or third decades of life). Additionally, the pathogenesis of PXE is not related to UV radiation exposure. The hereditary form develops due to a gene variation, whereas the acquired form may be due to conditions associated with physiologic and/or mechanical stress.¹ 

Anetoderma, also known as macular atrophy, is another condition that demonstrates elastic tissue loss in the dermis on histopathology.¹ Anetoderma commonly is seen in younger patients and can be differentiated from FP by the antecedent presence of an inflammatory process. Anetoderma is classified as primary or secondary. Primary anetoderma is associated with prothrombotic abnormalities, while secondary anetoderma is associated with systemic disease including but not limited to sarcoidosis, systemic lupus erythematous, and Graves disease.¹

Neither lichen myxedematosus (LM) nor lichen amyloidosis (LA) are true elastolytic conditions. Lichen myxedematosus is considered in the differential diagnosis of FP due to the associated loss of elastin observed with disease progression. An idiopathic cutaneous mucinosis, LM is a localized form of scleromyxedema, which is characterized by small, firm, waxy papules; mucin deposition in the skin; fibroblast proliferation; and fibrosis. On histologic analysis, typical findings of LM include irregularly arranged fibroblasts, diffuse mucin deposition within the upper and mid reticular dermis, increased collagen deposition, and a decrease in elastin fibers.⁵ 

Lichen amyloidosis is a subtype of primary localized cutaneous amyloidosis, a rare condition characterized by the extracellular deposition of amyloid proteins in the skin and a lack of systemic involvement. Although it is not an elastolytic condition, LA is clinically similar to FP, often manifesting as multiple localized, pruritic, hyperpigmented papules that can coalesce into larger plaques; it tends to develop on the shins, calves, ankles, and thighs.^6,7 The condition commonly manifests in the fifth and sixth decades of life; however, in contrast to FP, LA is more prevalent in men and individuals from Central and South American as well as Middle Eastern and non-Chinese Asian populations.⁸ Lichen amyloidosis is a keratin-derived amyloidosis with cytokeratin-based amyloid precursors that only deposit in the dermis.⁶ Histopathology reveals colloid bodies due to the presence of apoptotic basal keratinocytes. The etiology of LA is unknown, but on rare occasions it has been associated with multiple endocrine neoplasia 2A rearranged during transfection mutations.⁶ 

In summary, FP is an uncommonly diagnosed elastolytic condition that often is asymptomatic or associated with mild pruritus. Biopsy is warranted to help differentiate it from mimicker conditions that may be associated with systemic disease. Currently, there is no established therapy that provides successful treatment. Research suggests unsatisfactory results with the use of topical tretinoin or topical antioxidants.3 More recently, nonablative fractional resurfacing lasers have been evaluated as a possible therapeutic strategy of promise for elastic disorders.⁹

Infantile hemangioma (IH) is the most common vascular tumor of infancy, appearing within the first few weeks of life and typically reaching peak size by age 3 to 5 months.¹ It classically manifests as a raised or flat bright-red lesion in the upper dermis of the skin and/or subcutaneous tissue and can vary in number, size, shape, and location.² It is characterized by a rapid proliferative phase, especially between 5 and 8 weeks of age, followed by gradual spontaneous regression over 1 to 10 years.^1-3

Infantile hemangiomas are categorized based on depth (superficial, deep, or mixed) and distribution pattern (focal, multifocal, segmental, or indeterminate).⁴ In most cases, complete regression occurs by age 4 years, but there can be residual telangiectasia, fibrofatty tissue, and/or scarring.^1,4 About 10% to 15% of IHs result in complications that require medical intervention (eg, visual, airway, or auditory compromise; ulceration; disfigurement); ideally, these patients should be referred to a specialist by 5 weeks of age.⁴ Prompt assessment of IH severity is essential to prevent or mitigate potential complications and ultimately improve outcomes.³ Social drivers of health contribute to delayed diagnosis and management of hemangiomas, leading to increased complications in some patient populations.^5-7

Epidemiology

Infantile hemangiomas are estimated to manifest in 4.5% of infants in the United States.¹ The most common type is superficial IH, typically found on the head or neck.⁵ Risk factors in infants include female sex, White race, premature birth, and low birth weight (< 1000 g).^1,3 Maternal risk factors include advanced gestational age (ie, > 35 years), multiple gestations, family history of IH, tobacco use, use of progesterone therapy during pregnancy, and pre-eclampsia.^1,3

Focal IH typically manifests as a single localized lesion that can occur anywhere on the body.^2,3 In contrast, segmental IH manifests in a linear pattern and/or is distributed on a large anatomic area, most commonly on the face and less frequently the extremities and trunk.^2,3 Segmental IHs are more common in Hispanic patients and carry a higher risk for morbidity, often complicated by ulceration that can lead to functional and cosmetic challenges.⁸

Key Clinical Features

Superficial IH in patients with darker skin tones may appear as a dark-red or violaceous papule or plaque compared to bright red in lighter skin tones.⁵ Deep IH may appear as a soft, round, flesh-colored or blue-hued subcutaneous mass, the color of which may be harder to appreciate in those with darker skin tones.⁵

Worth Noting

Complications from IH may require imaging, close follow-up, systemic therapy, multidisciplinary care, and advanced health literacy and patient/family navigation. Multifocal IHs (≥ 5 lesions) are more likely to be associated with infantile hepatic hemangiomas.^2,3 Large (> 5 cm) segmental IHs on the face and lumbosacral area require further evaluation for PHACES (posterior fossa malformation, hemangiomas, arterial anomalies, cardiac defects, eye anomalies, and sternal raphe/cleft defects) and LUMBAR (lower-body segmental IH; urogenital anomalies and ulceration; ­myelopathy; bony deformities; anorectal malformations and arterial anomalies; and renal anomalies) syndromes, which are more common in patients of Hispanic ethnicity.^2,3

The Infantile Hemangioma Referral Score is a recently validated tool that can assist primary care physicians in timely referral of IHs requiring early specialist intervention.^4,9 It takes into account the location, number, and size of the lesions and the age of the patient; these factors help to determine which IHs may be managed conservatively vs those that may require treatment to prevent ­life-threatening complications.^1-3 

Systemic corticosteroids historically have been the primary treatment for IH; however, in the past decade, propranolol oral solution (4.28 mg/mL) has become the first-line therapy for most infants requiring systemic management.¹⁰ It is the only medication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for proliferating IH, with treatment initiation as young as 5 weeks corrected age.¹¹ As a nonselective beta-blocker, propranolol is believed to reduce IHs through vasoconstriction or by inhibition of angiogenesis.^1,4,10 

For small superficial IHs, treatment options include timolol maleate ophthalmic solution 0.5% (one drop applied twice daily to the IH) or pulsed dye laser therapy.^4,10 Surgical excision typically is avoided during infancy due to concerns about anesthetic risks and potential blood loss.^4,10 Surgery is reserved for cases involving residual fibrofatty tissue, postinvolution scarring, obstruction of vital structures, or lesions in aesthetically sensitive areas as well as when propranolol is contraindicated.^4,10

Health Disparity Highlight

Infants with skin of color and those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) face a heightened risk for delayed diagnosis and more advanced disease at the initial evaluation for IH.^5,7 Access barriers such as geographic limitations to specialty services, lack of insurance, underinsurance, and language differences impact timely diagnosis and treatment.^5,6 Implementation of telemedicine services in areas with limited access to specialists can facilitate early evaluation and risk stratification for IH.¹²

A retrospective cohort study of 804 children seen at a large academic hospital found that those of lower SES were more likely to seek care after 3 months of age than their higher-SES counterparts.⁶ Those who presented after 6 months of age also had higher IH severity scores compared to their counterparts with higher SES.⁶ Delayed access to care may cause children to miss the critical treatment window during the rapid proliferative growth phase.^6,12 However, children insured through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program who participated in institutional care management programs (which assist in scheduling specialty care appointments within the institution) sought treatment earlier regardless of their SES, suggesting that such programs may help reduce disparities in timely access for children of lower SES.⁶ 

An epidemiologic study analyzing the demographics of children hospitalized across the United States demonstrated that Black infants with IH were more likely to belong to the lowest income quartile compared with White infants or those of other races. They also were 2 times older on average at initial presentation (1.8 vs 1.0 years), experienced longer hospitalizations (16.4 vs 13.8 days), and underwent more IH-related procedures than White infants and infants of other races (2.4, 1.9, and 2.1, respectively).⁷

These and other factors may contribute to missed windows of opportunity for timely treatment of high-risk IHs in patients with darker skin tones and/or those facing challenges stemming from social drivers of health.

Infantile hemangioma (IH) is the most common vascular tumor of infancy, appearing within the first few weeks of life and typically reaching peak size by age 3 to 5 months.¹ It classically manifests as a raised or flat bright-red lesion in the upper dermis of the skin and/or subcutaneous tissue and can vary in number, size, shape, and location.² It is characterized by a rapid proliferative phase, especially between 5 and 8 weeks of age, followed by gradual spontaneous regression over 1 to 10 years.^1-3

Infantile hemangiomas are categorized based on depth (superficial, deep, or mixed) and distribution pattern (focal, multifocal, segmental, or indeterminate).⁴ In most cases, complete regression occurs by age 4 years, but there can be residual telangiectasia, fibrofatty tissue, and/or scarring.^1,4 About 10% to 15% of IHs result in complications that require medical intervention (eg, visual, airway, or auditory compromise; ulceration; disfigurement); ideally, these patients should be referred to a specialist by 5 weeks of age.⁴ Prompt assessment of IH severity is essential to prevent or mitigate potential complications and ultimately improve outcomes.³ Social drivers of health contribute to delayed diagnosis and management of hemangiomas, leading to increased complications in some patient populations.^5-7

Epidemiology

Infantile hemangiomas are estimated to manifest in 4.5% of infants in the United States.¹ The most common type is superficial IH, typically found on the head or neck.⁵ Risk factors in infants include female sex, White race, premature birth, and low birth weight (< 1000 g).^1,3 Maternal risk factors include advanced gestational age (ie, > 35 years), multiple gestations, family history of IH, tobacco use, use of progesterone therapy during pregnancy, and pre-eclampsia.^1,3

Focal IH typically manifests as a single localized lesion that can occur anywhere on the body.^2,3 In contrast, segmental IH manifests in a linear pattern and/or is distributed on a large anatomic area, most commonly on the face and less frequently the extremities and trunk.^2,3 Segmental IHs are more common in Hispanic patients and carry a higher risk for morbidity, often complicated by ulceration that can lead to functional and cosmetic challenges.⁸

Key Clinical Features

Superficial IH in patients with darker skin tones may appear as a dark-red or violaceous papule or plaque compared to bright red in lighter skin tones.⁵ Deep IH may appear as a soft, round, flesh-colored or blue-hued subcutaneous mass, the color of which may be harder to appreciate in those with darker skin tones.⁵

Worth Noting

Complications from IH may require imaging, close follow-up, systemic therapy, multidisciplinary care, and advanced health literacy and patient/family navigation. Multifocal IHs (≥ 5 lesions) are more likely to be associated with infantile hepatic hemangiomas.^2,3 Large (> 5 cm) segmental IHs on the face and lumbosacral area require further evaluation for PHACES (posterior fossa malformation, hemangiomas, arterial anomalies, cardiac defects, eye anomalies, and sternal raphe/cleft defects) and LUMBAR (lower-body segmental IH; urogenital anomalies and ulceration; ­myelopathy; bony deformities; anorectal malformations and arterial anomalies; and renal anomalies) syndromes, which are more common in patients of Hispanic ethnicity.^2,3

The Infantile Hemangioma Referral Score is a recently validated tool that can assist primary care physicians in timely referral of IHs requiring early specialist intervention.^4,9 It takes into account the location, number, and size of the lesions and the age of the patient; these factors help to determine which IHs may be managed conservatively vs those that may require treatment to prevent ­life-threatening complications.^1-3 

Systemic corticosteroids historically have been the primary treatment for IH; however, in the past decade, propranolol oral solution (4.28 mg/mL) has become the first-line therapy for most infants requiring systemic management.¹⁰ It is the only medication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for proliferating IH, with treatment initiation as young as 5 weeks corrected age.¹¹ As a nonselective beta-blocker, propranolol is believed to reduce IHs through vasoconstriction or by inhibition of angiogenesis.^1,4,10 

For small superficial IHs, treatment options include timolol maleate ophthalmic solution 0.5% (one drop applied twice daily to the IH) or pulsed dye laser therapy.^4,10 Surgical excision typically is avoided during infancy due to concerns about anesthetic risks and potential blood loss.^4,10 Surgery is reserved for cases involving residual fibrofatty tissue, postinvolution scarring, obstruction of vital structures, or lesions in aesthetically sensitive areas as well as when propranolol is contraindicated.^4,10

Health Disparity Highlight

Infants with skin of color and those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) face a heightened risk for delayed diagnosis and more advanced disease at the initial evaluation for IH.^5,7 Access barriers such as geographic limitations to specialty services, lack of insurance, underinsurance, and language differences impact timely diagnosis and treatment.^5,6 Implementation of telemedicine services in areas with limited access to specialists can facilitate early evaluation and risk stratification for IH.¹²

A retrospective cohort study of 804 children seen at a large academic hospital found that those of lower SES were more likely to seek care after 3 months of age than their higher-SES counterparts.⁶ Those who presented after 6 months of age also had higher IH severity scores compared to their counterparts with higher SES.⁶ Delayed access to care may cause children to miss the critical treatment window during the rapid proliferative growth phase.^6,12 However, children insured through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program who participated in institutional care management programs (which assist in scheduling specialty care appointments within the institution) sought treatment earlier regardless of their SES, suggesting that such programs may help reduce disparities in timely access for children of lower SES.⁶ 

An epidemiologic study analyzing the demographics of children hospitalized across the United States demonstrated that Black infants with IH were more likely to belong to the lowest income quartile compared with White infants or those of other races. They also were 2 times older on average at initial presentation (1.8 vs 1.0 years), experienced longer hospitalizations (16.4 vs 13.8 days), and underwent more IH-related procedures than White infants and infants of other races (2.4, 1.9, and 2.1, respectively).⁷

These and other factors may contribute to missed windows of opportunity for timely treatment of high-risk IHs in patients with darker skin tones and/or those facing challenges stemming from social drivers of health.

Infantile hemangioma (IH) is the most common vascular tumor of infancy, appearing within the first few weeks of life and typically reaching peak size by age 3 to 5 months.¹ It classically manifests as a raised or flat bright-red lesion in the upper dermis of the skin and/or subcutaneous tissue and can vary in number, size, shape, and location.² It is characterized by a rapid proliferative phase, especially between 5 and 8 weeks of age, followed by gradual spontaneous regression over 1 to 10 years.^1-3

Infantile hemangiomas are categorized based on depth (superficial, deep, or mixed) and distribution pattern (focal, multifocal, segmental, or indeterminate).⁴ In most cases, complete regression occurs by age 4 years, but there can be residual telangiectasia, fibrofatty tissue, and/or scarring.^1,4 About 10% to 15% of IHs result in complications that require medical intervention (eg, visual, airway, or auditory compromise; ulceration; disfigurement); ideally, these patients should be referred to a specialist by 5 weeks of age.⁴ Prompt assessment of IH severity is essential to prevent or mitigate potential complications and ultimately improve outcomes.³ Social drivers of health contribute to delayed diagnosis and management of hemangiomas, leading to increased complications in some patient populations.^5-7

Epidemiology

Infantile hemangiomas are estimated to manifest in 4.5% of infants in the United States.¹ The most common type is superficial IH, typically found on the head or neck.⁵ Risk factors in infants include female sex, White race, premature birth, and low birth weight (< 1000 g).^1,3 Maternal risk factors include advanced gestational age (ie, > 35 years), multiple gestations, family history of IH, tobacco use, use of progesterone therapy during pregnancy, and pre-eclampsia.^1,3

Focal IH typically manifests as a single localized lesion that can occur anywhere on the body.^2,3 In contrast, segmental IH manifests in a linear pattern and/or is distributed on a large anatomic area, most commonly on the face and less frequently the extremities and trunk.^2,3 Segmental IHs are more common in Hispanic patients and carry a higher risk for morbidity, often complicated by ulceration that can lead to functional and cosmetic challenges.⁸

Key Clinical Features

Superficial IH in patients with darker skin tones may appear as a dark-red or violaceous papule or plaque compared to bright red in lighter skin tones.⁵ Deep IH may appear as a soft, round, flesh-colored or blue-hued subcutaneous mass, the color of which may be harder to appreciate in those with darker skin tones.⁵

Worth Noting

Complications from IH may require imaging, close follow-up, systemic therapy, multidisciplinary care, and advanced health literacy and patient/family navigation. Multifocal IHs (≥ 5 lesions) are more likely to be associated with infantile hepatic hemangiomas.^2,3 Large (> 5 cm) segmental IHs on the face and lumbosacral area require further evaluation for PHACES (posterior fossa malformation, hemangiomas, arterial anomalies, cardiac defects, eye anomalies, and sternal raphe/cleft defects) and LUMBAR (lower-body segmental IH; urogenital anomalies and ulceration; ­myelopathy; bony deformities; anorectal malformations and arterial anomalies; and renal anomalies) syndromes, which are more common in patients of Hispanic ethnicity.^2,3

The Infantile Hemangioma Referral Score is a recently validated tool that can assist primary care physicians in timely referral of IHs requiring early specialist intervention.^4,9 It takes into account the location, number, and size of the lesions and the age of the patient; these factors help to determine which IHs may be managed conservatively vs those that may require treatment to prevent ­life-threatening complications.^1-3 

Systemic corticosteroids historically have been the primary treatment for IH; however, in the past decade, propranolol oral solution (4.28 mg/mL) has become the first-line therapy for most infants requiring systemic management.¹⁰ It is the only medication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for proliferating IH, with treatment initiation as young as 5 weeks corrected age.¹¹ As a nonselective beta-blocker, propranolol is believed to reduce IHs through vasoconstriction or by inhibition of angiogenesis.^1,4,10 

For small superficial IHs, treatment options include timolol maleate ophthalmic solution 0.5% (one drop applied twice daily to the IH) or pulsed dye laser therapy.^4,10 Surgical excision typically is avoided during infancy due to concerns about anesthetic risks and potential blood loss.^4,10 Surgery is reserved for cases involving residual fibrofatty tissue, postinvolution scarring, obstruction of vital structures, or lesions in aesthetically sensitive areas as well as when propranolol is contraindicated.^4,10

Health Disparity Highlight

Infants with skin of color and those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) face a heightened risk for delayed diagnosis and more advanced disease at the initial evaluation for IH.^5,7 Access barriers such as geographic limitations to specialty services, lack of insurance, underinsurance, and language differences impact timely diagnosis and treatment.^5,6 Implementation of telemedicine services in areas with limited access to specialists can facilitate early evaluation and risk stratification for IH.¹²

A retrospective cohort study of 804 children seen at a large academic hospital found that those of lower SES were more likely to seek care after 3 months of age than their higher-SES counterparts.⁶ Those who presented after 6 months of age also had higher IH severity scores compared to their counterparts with higher SES.⁶ Delayed access to care may cause children to miss the critical treatment window during the rapid proliferative growth phase.^6,12 However, children insured through Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program who participated in institutional care management programs (which assist in scheduling specialty care appointments within the institution) sought treatment earlier regardless of their SES, suggesting that such programs may help reduce disparities in timely access for children of lower SES.⁶ 

An epidemiologic study analyzing the demographics of children hospitalized across the United States demonstrated that Black infants with IH were more likely to belong to the lowest income quartile compared with White infants or those of other races. They also were 2 times older on average at initial presentation (1.8 vs 1.0 years), experienced longer hospitalizations (16.4 vs 13.8 days), and underwent more IH-related procedures than White infants and infants of other races (2.4, 1.9, and 2.1, respectively).⁷

These and other factors may contribute to missed windows of opportunity for timely treatment of high-risk IHs in patients with darker skin tones and/or those facing challenges stemming from social drivers of health.

THE DIAGNOSIS: Folliculitis Decalvans

Biopsy results revealed a brisk perifollicular and intrafollicular mixed inflammatory infiltrate comprising lymphocytes, neutrophils, and plasma cells filling the upper dermis and encircling dilated hair follicles. Elastic stain (Verhoeff-van Gieson) demonstrated loss of elastic fibers in areas of scarring. Periodic acid–Schiff with diastase staining was negative for fungal elements, while Gram staining revealed colonies of bacterial cocci in the stratum corneum and within the hair follicles. Immunofluorescence was unremarkable, and culture revealed methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, leading to a diagnosis of folliculitis decalvans (FD). The patient was treated with doxycycline 100 mg twice daily and received intralesional triamcinolone 2.5 mg/mL (total volume, 2 mL) every 6 weeks with considerable improvement in pustules, erythema, and scaling (Figure). While not yet in complete remission, our patient demonstrated short regrowing hairs in areas of incomplete scarring and focal remaining perifollicular erythema and scale along the midline frontal scalp 5 months after initial presentation.

Folliculitis decalvans is an uncommon subtype of cicatricial alopecia that may mimic other forms of alopecia. Cicatricial alopecia often is difficult to diagnose due to its overlapping clinical characteristics, but early diagnosis is essential for appropriate management and prevention of further permanent hair loss. Traditionally classified as a primary neutrophilic cicatricial alopecia, lymphocyte-predominant variants of FD now are recognized.¹

Patients with FD typically present with patchy scarring alopecia at the vertex scalp that gradually expands and may demonstrate secondary features of follicular tufting and pustules.^1-3 While the epidemiology of FD is poorly characterized, Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that FD accounted for 2.8% of all alopecia cases and 10.5% of cicatricial alopecia cases in a multicenter study of 2835 patients. The pathophysiology of FD still is under investigation but is thought to result from a dysregulated immune response to a chronic bacterial infection (eg, S aureus), with resulting neutrophilpredominant inflammation in early stages.^1-3 Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that, among 35 patients with FD cultured for bacteria, 74% (26/35) returned positive results, 96% (25/26) of which grew S aureus.⁵

A systematic review of 20 studies that included 263 patients found rifampin and clindamycin to be the most common treatments for FD; however, there is insufficient evidence to determine if this treatment is the most effective.⁶ In our patient, clindamycin was avoided due to its propensity to negatively alter the gut microbiome long term.⁷ Other therapies such as oral tetracyclines, high-potency topical steroids, and intralesional triamcinolone also can be used to achieve disease remission.^5,6 Other treatments such as isotretinoin, red-light photodynamic therapy, tacrolimus, and external beam radiation have been reported in the literature but vary in efficacy.⁶ Our patient improved on a regimen of topical benzoyl peroxide wash, oral doxycycline, and intralesional triamcinolone.

Notably, FD may share clinical features with other causes of cicatricial alopecia. In our patient, FD mimicked other entities including discoid lupus erythematosus, frontal fibrosing alopecia, dissecting cellulitis, and erosive pustular dermatosis (Table).^1-14 Discoid lupus erythematosus manifests as round hypopigmented and hyperpigmented plaques with associated atrophy, perifollicular erythema, and follicular plugging. Frontal fibrosing alopecia is a primary lymphocytic scarring alopecia that manifests in a bandlike linear distribution over the frontal scalp and may involve the temporal scalp, posterior hairline, and/or eyebrows. Isolated hairs (known as lonely hairs) often are seen. Dissecting cellulitis is characterized by boggy nodules associated with alopecia on the scalp without notable epidermal change, although pustules and sinus tracts may develop.⁹ Erosive pustular dermatosis is a diagnosis of exclusion but often is seen in older adults with chronic sun damage and clinically manifests with eroded plaques with adherent crusts.¹⁰

While our patient presented with several overlapping clinical features, including progressive hair loss along the frontal scalp in a bandlike pattern suspicious for frontal fibrosing alopecia as well as atrophic depigmented plaques with adherent peripheral scaling suspicious for discoid lupus erythematosus, the presence of pustules was an important clue. The biopsy demonstrating a mixed infiltrate inclusive of neutrophils confirmed the diagnosis of FD.

THE DIAGNOSIS: Folliculitis Decalvans

Biopsy results revealed a brisk perifollicular and intrafollicular mixed inflammatory infiltrate comprising lymphocytes, neutrophils, and plasma cells filling the upper dermis and encircling dilated hair follicles. Elastic stain (Verhoeff-van Gieson) demonstrated loss of elastic fibers in areas of scarring. Periodic acid–Schiff with diastase staining was negative for fungal elements, while Gram staining revealed colonies of bacterial cocci in the stratum corneum and within the hair follicles. Immunofluorescence was unremarkable, and culture revealed methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, leading to a diagnosis of folliculitis decalvans (FD). The patient was treated with doxycycline 100 mg twice daily and received intralesional triamcinolone 2.5 mg/mL (total volume, 2 mL) every 6 weeks with considerable improvement in pustules, erythema, and scaling (Figure). While not yet in complete remission, our patient demonstrated short regrowing hairs in areas of incomplete scarring and focal remaining perifollicular erythema and scale along the midline frontal scalp 5 months after initial presentation.

Folliculitis decalvans is an uncommon subtype of cicatricial alopecia that may mimic other forms of alopecia. Cicatricial alopecia often is difficult to diagnose due to its overlapping clinical characteristics, but early diagnosis is essential for appropriate management and prevention of further permanent hair loss. Traditionally classified as a primary neutrophilic cicatricial alopecia, lymphocyte-predominant variants of FD now are recognized.¹

Patients with FD typically present with patchy scarring alopecia at the vertex scalp that gradually expands and may demonstrate secondary features of follicular tufting and pustules.^1-3 While the epidemiology of FD is poorly characterized, Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that FD accounted for 2.8% of all alopecia cases and 10.5% of cicatricial alopecia cases in a multicenter study of 2835 patients. The pathophysiology of FD still is under investigation but is thought to result from a dysregulated immune response to a chronic bacterial infection (eg, S aureus), with resulting neutrophilpredominant inflammation in early stages.^1-3 Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that, among 35 patients with FD cultured for bacteria, 74% (26/35) returned positive results, 96% (25/26) of which grew S aureus.⁵

A systematic review of 20 studies that included 263 patients found rifampin and clindamycin to be the most common treatments for FD; however, there is insufficient evidence to determine if this treatment is the most effective.⁶ In our patient, clindamycin was avoided due to its propensity to negatively alter the gut microbiome long term.⁷ Other therapies such as oral tetracyclines, high-potency topical steroids, and intralesional triamcinolone also can be used to achieve disease remission.^5,6 Other treatments such as isotretinoin, red-light photodynamic therapy, tacrolimus, and external beam radiation have been reported in the literature but vary in efficacy.⁶ Our patient improved on a regimen of topical benzoyl peroxide wash, oral doxycycline, and intralesional triamcinolone.

Notably, FD may share clinical features with other causes of cicatricial alopecia. In our patient, FD mimicked other entities including discoid lupus erythematosus, frontal fibrosing alopecia, dissecting cellulitis, and erosive pustular dermatosis (Table).^1-14 Discoid lupus erythematosus manifests as round hypopigmented and hyperpigmented plaques with associated atrophy, perifollicular erythema, and follicular plugging. Frontal fibrosing alopecia is a primary lymphocytic scarring alopecia that manifests in a bandlike linear distribution over the frontal scalp and may involve the temporal scalp, posterior hairline, and/or eyebrows. Isolated hairs (known as lonely hairs) often are seen. Dissecting cellulitis is characterized by boggy nodules associated with alopecia on the scalp without notable epidermal change, although pustules and sinus tracts may develop.⁹ Erosive pustular dermatosis is a diagnosis of exclusion but often is seen in older adults with chronic sun damage and clinically manifests with eroded plaques with adherent crusts.¹⁰

While our patient presented with several overlapping clinical features, including progressive hair loss along the frontal scalp in a bandlike pattern suspicious for frontal fibrosing alopecia as well as atrophic depigmented plaques with adherent peripheral scaling suspicious for discoid lupus erythematosus, the presence of pustules was an important clue. The biopsy demonstrating a mixed infiltrate inclusive of neutrophils confirmed the diagnosis of FD.

THE DIAGNOSIS: Folliculitis Decalvans

Biopsy results revealed a brisk perifollicular and intrafollicular mixed inflammatory infiltrate comprising lymphocytes, neutrophils, and plasma cells filling the upper dermis and encircling dilated hair follicles. Elastic stain (Verhoeff-van Gieson) demonstrated loss of elastic fibers in areas of scarring. Periodic acid–Schiff with diastase staining was negative for fungal elements, while Gram staining revealed colonies of bacterial cocci in the stratum corneum and within the hair follicles. Immunofluorescence was unremarkable, and culture revealed methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, leading to a diagnosis of folliculitis decalvans (FD). The patient was treated with doxycycline 100 mg twice daily and received intralesional triamcinolone 2.5 mg/mL (total volume, 2 mL) every 6 weeks with considerable improvement in pustules, erythema, and scaling (Figure). While not yet in complete remission, our patient demonstrated short regrowing hairs in areas of incomplete scarring and focal remaining perifollicular erythema and scale along the midline frontal scalp 5 months after initial presentation.

Folliculitis decalvans is an uncommon subtype of cicatricial alopecia that may mimic other forms of alopecia. Cicatricial alopecia often is difficult to diagnose due to its overlapping clinical characteristics, but early diagnosis is essential for appropriate management and prevention of further permanent hair loss. Traditionally classified as a primary neutrophilic cicatricial alopecia, lymphocyte-predominant variants of FD now are recognized.¹

Patients with FD typically present with patchy scarring alopecia at the vertex scalp that gradually expands and may demonstrate secondary features of follicular tufting and pustules.^1-3 While the epidemiology of FD is poorly characterized, Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that FD accounted for 2.8% of all alopecia cases and 10.5% of cicatricial alopecia cases in a multicenter study of 2835 patients. The pathophysiology of FD still is under investigation but is thought to result from a dysregulated immune response to a chronic bacterial infection (eg, S aureus), with resulting neutrophilpredominant inflammation in early stages.^1-3 Vañó-Galván et al⁴ reported that, among 35 patients with FD cultured for bacteria, 74% (26/35) returned positive results, 96% (25/26) of which grew S aureus.⁵

A systematic review of 20 studies that included 263 patients found rifampin and clindamycin to be the most common treatments for FD; however, there is insufficient evidence to determine if this treatment is the most effective.⁶ In our patient, clindamycin was avoided due to its propensity to negatively alter the gut microbiome long term.⁷ Other therapies such as oral tetracyclines, high-potency topical steroids, and intralesional triamcinolone also can be used to achieve disease remission.^5,6 Other treatments such as isotretinoin, red-light photodynamic therapy, tacrolimus, and external beam radiation have been reported in the literature but vary in efficacy.⁶ Our patient improved on a regimen of topical benzoyl peroxide wash, oral doxycycline, and intralesional triamcinolone.

Notably, FD may share clinical features with other causes of cicatricial alopecia. In our patient, FD mimicked other entities including discoid lupus erythematosus, frontal fibrosing alopecia, dissecting cellulitis, and erosive pustular dermatosis (Table).^1-14 Discoid lupus erythematosus manifests as round hypopigmented and hyperpigmented plaques with associated atrophy, perifollicular erythema, and follicular plugging. Frontal fibrosing alopecia is a primary lymphocytic scarring alopecia that manifests in a bandlike linear distribution over the frontal scalp and may involve the temporal scalp, posterior hairline, and/or eyebrows. Isolated hairs (known as lonely hairs) often are seen. Dissecting cellulitis is characterized by boggy nodules associated with alopecia on the scalp without notable epidermal change, although pustules and sinus tracts may develop.⁹ Erosive pustular dermatosis is a diagnosis of exclusion but often is seen in older adults with chronic sun damage and clinically manifests with eroded plaques with adherent crusts.¹⁰

While our patient presented with several overlapping clinical features, including progressive hair loss along the frontal scalp in a bandlike pattern suspicious for frontal fibrosing alopecia as well as atrophic depigmented plaques with adherent peripheral scaling suspicious for discoid lupus erythematosus, the presence of pustules was an important clue. The biopsy demonstrating a mixed infiltrate inclusive of neutrophils confirmed the diagnosis of FD.

The original four HPEER Advanced Fellowship sites were established by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Academic Affiliation in 2014, and expanded in 2020 to include 8 sites and a national coordinating center with leadership shared between VA facilities in Houston and White River Junction. The VA invests heavily in training the nation’s healthcare professionals. The mission of HPEER is to develop leaders who can educate, evaluate, and innovate in Health Professions Education for the VA and the nation. All HPEER sites take part in a nationally coordinated curriculum covering topics in curriculum design, learner assessment, leadership, interprofessional education, as well as scholarship and educational research.

As part of the national HPEER curriculum covering scholarship and educational research, and in concert with Wednesday, May 14, 2025 VA Research Week 2025, HPEER organized a joint conference with the Center for Health Professions Education at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS). This interagency online event included poster sessions and oral presentations from HPEER fellows and students in USUHS certificate and graduate degree programs.

Education scholarship is broad, ranging from descriptions of curricular innovations and works in progress to advanced research using techniques drawn from psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, and other scientific disciplines. The abstracts presented here summarize some of the work being done by HPEER fellows. Dougherty et al (Boston) described a project to create a primer outlining methodology for conducting and interpreting cost-effectiveness evaluations in the context of proposed HPE innovations. Cohen et al (Cleveland) found reduction in potentially problematic orders in the context of life-sustaining treatment following a multifaceted intervention program. Sorenson (Dublin, Georgia) reported an expanded Tai Chi program that included modifications allowing seated positions for veterans with mobility limitations. Young et al (Dublin) described an interprofessional curriculum to strengthen communication between nurses and social workers in their conversations with women veterans living in rural settings. Misedah-Robinson et al (Houston) showed that a new training program strengthened coordinators’ self-reports of preparedness and confidence in their ability to support veterans who have experienced human trafficking. Tovar et al (Salt Lake City) describe a methodology for using data from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse to optimize schedules of HPE students assigned to VA clinical rotations. Yanez et al (San Francisco) presented initial observations of learner-centered outcomes following participation in a new multidisciplinary integrative health elective. Resto et al (West Haven) reported that implementation of self-serve kiosks increased distribution of substance use harm reduction resources beyond usual clinical care.

A second joint conference between VA HPEER and USUHS is planned for VA Research Week 2026; we look forward to the abstracts that will be produced by this new cohort of fellows, as well as to the future scholarship and contributions to the field that will be made by alumni of the HPEER Advanced Fellowship.

The original four HPEER Advanced Fellowship sites were established by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Academic Affiliation in 2014, and expanded in 2020 to include 8 sites and a national coordinating center with leadership shared between VA facilities in Houston and White River Junction. The VA invests heavily in training the nation’s healthcare professionals. The mission of HPEER is to develop leaders who can educate, evaluate, and innovate in Health Professions Education for the VA and the nation. All HPEER sites take part in a nationally coordinated curriculum covering topics in curriculum design, learner assessment, leadership, interprofessional education, as well as scholarship and educational research.

As part of the national HPEER curriculum covering scholarship and educational research, and in concert with Wednesday, May 14, 2025 VA Research Week 2025, HPEER organized a joint conference with the Center for Health Professions Education at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS). This interagency online event included poster sessions and oral presentations from HPEER fellows and students in USUHS certificate and graduate degree programs.

Education scholarship is broad, ranging from descriptions of curricular innovations and works in progress to advanced research using techniques drawn from psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, and other scientific disciplines. The abstracts presented here summarize some of the work being done by HPEER fellows. Dougherty et al (Boston) described a project to create a primer outlining methodology for conducting and interpreting cost-effectiveness evaluations in the context of proposed HPE innovations. Cohen et al (Cleveland) found reduction in potentially problematic orders in the context of life-sustaining treatment following a multifaceted intervention program. Sorenson (Dublin, Georgia) reported an expanded Tai Chi program that included modifications allowing seated positions for veterans with mobility limitations. Young et al (Dublin) described an interprofessional curriculum to strengthen communication between nurses and social workers in their conversations with women veterans living in rural settings. Misedah-Robinson et al (Houston) showed that a new training program strengthened coordinators’ self-reports of preparedness and confidence in their ability to support veterans who have experienced human trafficking. Tovar et al (Salt Lake City) describe a methodology for using data from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse to optimize schedules of HPE students assigned to VA clinical rotations. Yanez et al (San Francisco) presented initial observations of learner-centered outcomes following participation in a new multidisciplinary integrative health elective. Resto et al (West Haven) reported that implementation of self-serve kiosks increased distribution of substance use harm reduction resources beyond usual clinical care.

A second joint conference between VA HPEER and USUHS is planned for VA Research Week 2026; we look forward to the abstracts that will be produced by this new cohort of fellows, as well as to the future scholarship and contributions to the field that will be made by alumni of the HPEER Advanced Fellowship.

The original four HPEER Advanced Fellowship sites were established by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Office of Academic Affiliation in 2014, and expanded in 2020 to include 8 sites and a national coordinating center with leadership shared between VA facilities in Houston and White River Junction. The VA invests heavily in training the nation’s healthcare professionals. The mission of HPEER is to develop leaders who can educate, evaluate, and innovate in Health Professions Education for the VA and the nation. All HPEER sites take part in a nationally coordinated curriculum covering topics in curriculum design, learner assessment, leadership, interprofessional education, as well as scholarship and educational research.

As part of the national HPEER curriculum covering scholarship and educational research, and in concert with Wednesday, May 14, 2025 VA Research Week 2025, HPEER organized a joint conference with the Center for Health Professions Education at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS). This interagency online event included poster sessions and oral presentations from HPEER fellows and students in USUHS certificate and graduate degree programs.

Education scholarship is broad, ranging from descriptions of curricular innovations and works in progress to advanced research using techniques drawn from psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, and other scientific disciplines. The abstracts presented here summarize some of the work being done by HPEER fellows. Dougherty et al (Boston) described a project to create a primer outlining methodology for conducting and interpreting cost-effectiveness evaluations in the context of proposed HPE innovations. Cohen et al (Cleveland) found reduction in potentially problematic orders in the context of life-sustaining treatment following a multifaceted intervention program. Sorenson (Dublin, Georgia) reported an expanded Tai Chi program that included modifications allowing seated positions for veterans with mobility limitations. Young et al (Dublin) described an interprofessional curriculum to strengthen communication between nurses and social workers in their conversations with women veterans living in rural settings. Misedah-Robinson et al (Houston) showed that a new training program strengthened coordinators’ self-reports of preparedness and confidence in their ability to support veterans who have experienced human trafficking. Tovar et al (Salt Lake City) describe a methodology for using data from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse to optimize schedules of HPE students assigned to VA clinical rotations. Yanez et al (San Francisco) presented initial observations of learner-centered outcomes following participation in a new multidisciplinary integrative health elective. Resto et al (West Haven) reported that implementation of self-serve kiosks increased distribution of substance use harm reduction resources beyond usual clinical care.

A second joint conference between VA HPEER and USUHS is planned for VA Research Week 2026; we look forward to the abstracts that will be produced by this new cohort of fellows, as well as to the future scholarship and contributions to the field that will be made by alumni of the HPEER Advanced Fellowship.

Background

Veterans may have a greater risk of experiencing human trafficking (HT) than the general population because of social aspects of health, including housing insecurity, justice involvement, food insecurity, and adverse childhood events.^1-4 Since 2023, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has explored veterans’ experiences of HT through the Anti-Human Trafficking (AHT) Pilot Project.  This quality improvement project evaluated: 1) development of clinician AHT training materials to enhance identification and response to Veterans experiencing HT, and 2) educational resources aimed at raising awareness tailored to veterans and clinicians.

Methods

South Central Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center (SCMIRECC) facilitated two focus group discussions with AHT coordinators implementing the pilot at six sites. Based on discussions and leadership input, SCMIRECC developed a training curriculum, with bi-weekly readings culminating in a two-hour workshop. Training evaluation followed Kirkpatrick’s model using questions adapted from the Provider Responses, Treatment, and Care for Trafficked People (PROTECT) Survey.^5,6 Veteran-facing materials, including a brochure and whiteboard video, were reviewed by two Veteran Consumer Advisory Boards (CAB). The brochures, whiteboard video, and awareness modules were developed and revised based on feedback from focus group discussions. VA Central Office cleared all materials.

Results

Coordinators were satisfied with the training (mean, 4.20). After the training, none of the coordinators (n = 6) felt unprepared to assist Veterans (pre-training mean, 2.25; post-training mean, 1.40), and confidence in documentation improved (pre-training mean, 3.00; post-training mean, 3.40). Veteran CAB members recommended simplified language and veteran-centered messaging. The coordinators found the brochures and training useful. Recommendations included adding more representation to brochure covers, advanced training, a list of commonly asked questions, and a simplified screening tool. Barriers included delays in material development due to language guidance under recent executive orders.

Conclusions

The AHT training improved coordinators’ preparedness and confidence in supporting Veterans with trafficking experiences. Feedback emphasized the value of concise, Veteran-centered materials and a practical HT screening tool. These findings support the continued implementation of AHT education across VA settings to enhance identification and response for Veterans at risk of HT.

Background

Veterans may have a greater risk of experiencing human trafficking (HT) than the general population because of social aspects of health, including housing insecurity, justice involvement, food insecurity, and adverse childhood events.^1-4 Since 2023, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has explored veterans’ experiences of HT through the Anti-Human Trafficking (AHT) Pilot Project.  This quality improvement project evaluated: 1) development of clinician AHT training materials to enhance identification and response to Veterans experiencing HT, and 2) educational resources aimed at raising awareness tailored to veterans and clinicians.

Methods

South Central Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center (SCMIRECC) facilitated two focus group discussions with AHT coordinators implementing the pilot at six sites. Based on discussions and leadership input, SCMIRECC developed a training curriculum, with bi-weekly readings culminating in a two-hour workshop. Training evaluation followed Kirkpatrick’s model using questions adapted from the Provider Responses, Treatment, and Care for Trafficked People (PROTECT) Survey.^5,6 Veteran-facing materials, including a brochure and whiteboard video, were reviewed by two Veteran Consumer Advisory Boards (CAB). The brochures, whiteboard video, and awareness modules were developed and revised based on feedback from focus group discussions. VA Central Office cleared all materials.

Results

Coordinators were satisfied with the training (mean, 4.20). After the training, none of the coordinators (n = 6) felt unprepared to assist Veterans (pre-training mean, 2.25; post-training mean, 1.40), and confidence in documentation improved (pre-training mean, 3.00; post-training mean, 3.40). Veteran CAB members recommended simplified language and veteran-centered messaging. The coordinators found the brochures and training useful. Recommendations included adding more representation to brochure covers, advanced training, a list of commonly asked questions, and a simplified screening tool. Barriers included delays in material development due to language guidance under recent executive orders.

Conclusions

The AHT training improved coordinators’ preparedness and confidence in supporting Veterans with trafficking experiences. Feedback emphasized the value of concise, Veteran-centered materials and a practical HT screening tool. These findings support the continued implementation of AHT education across VA settings to enhance identification and response for Veterans at risk of HT.

Background

Veterans may have a greater risk of experiencing human trafficking (HT) than the general population because of social aspects of health, including housing insecurity, justice involvement, food insecurity, and adverse childhood events.^1-4 Since 2023, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has explored veterans’ experiences of HT through the Anti-Human Trafficking (AHT) Pilot Project.  This quality improvement project evaluated: 1) development of clinician AHT training materials to enhance identification and response to Veterans experiencing HT, and 2) educational resources aimed at raising awareness tailored to veterans and clinicians.

Methods

South Central Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center (SCMIRECC) facilitated two focus group discussions with AHT coordinators implementing the pilot at six sites. Based on discussions and leadership input, SCMIRECC developed a training curriculum, with bi-weekly readings culminating in a two-hour workshop. Training evaluation followed Kirkpatrick’s model using questions adapted from the Provider Responses, Treatment, and Care for Trafficked People (PROTECT) Survey.^5,6 Veteran-facing materials, including a brochure and whiteboard video, were reviewed by two Veteran Consumer Advisory Boards (CAB). The brochures, whiteboard video, and awareness modules were developed and revised based on feedback from focus group discussions. VA Central Office cleared all materials.

Results

Coordinators were satisfied with the training (mean, 4.20). After the training, none of the coordinators (n = 6) felt unprepared to assist Veterans (pre-training mean, 2.25; post-training mean, 1.40), and confidence in documentation improved (pre-training mean, 3.00; post-training mean, 3.40). Veteran CAB members recommended simplified language and veteran-centered messaging. The coordinators found the brochures and training useful. Recommendations included adding more representation to brochure covers, advanced training, a list of commonly asked questions, and a simplified screening tool. Barriers included delays in material development due to language guidance under recent executive orders.

Conclusions

The AHT training improved coordinators’ preparedness and confidence in supporting Veterans with trafficking experiences. Feedback emphasized the value of concise, Veteran-centered materials and a practical HT screening tool. These findings support the continued implementation of AHT education across VA settings to enhance identification and response for Veterans at risk of HT.

Background

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates an 80-hour weekly work limit for residents.¹ In contrast, decisions regarding undergraduate medical education (UME) are strongly influenced locally, with individual institutions setting academic policy for students. These differences in oversight reflect fundamental differences in residents’ and students’ roles in patient care, power, and responsibility. Considering rotation schedules, internal medicine (IM) clerkship directors have discussed the relative value of weekend vs weekday duty during inpatient rotations, a scheduling topic of interest to students as well, though these conversations are limited by a lack of knowledge regarding admission patterns. Addressing this information gap would inform policy decisions.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is uniquely positioned to address questions about UME clinical experiences nationwide: annually, over 118,000 students representing 97% of US medical schools train at VHA facilities.^2,3 We aim to compare the number and variety of patient encounter opportunities presenting during inpatient VHA IM rotations on weekdays versus weekends to inform policy decisions for UME rotation schedules.

Innovation

The VHA Corporate Data Warehouse will be queried for all admissions, diagnoses, and length of stay on inpatient IM services at the 420 VHA hospitals affiliated with US medical schools from 2016-2026. We will aggregate case data for day of week, floor, hospital, and Veteran Integrated Service Network (VISN), and determine number of admissions by weekday (Monday-Friday) and weekend (Saturday-Sunday). Weekday vs. weekend admission data will be compared using generalized mixed effects models for clustered longitudinal data. Heterogeneity across hospitals and VISNs will be explored to examine unique regional trends.

Results

We have drafted strategies to query and curate relevant datasets, developed a preliminary analysis plan, and await data deployment from VHA data stewards.

Conclusions

We believe this will be the first VHA-wide evaluation of patient encounter trends on IM services to examine potential training experiences for medical students. This will increase understanding of the critical role VHA has in developing the nations’ healthcare workforce, and how patterns of opportunities for clinical education may be distributed over time, informing decisions about rotation schedules to maximize students’ abilities to interact with, learn from, and serve our nation’s veterans

Background

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates an 80-hour weekly work limit for residents.¹ In contrast, decisions regarding undergraduate medical education (UME) are strongly influenced locally, with individual institutions setting academic policy for students. These differences in oversight reflect fundamental differences in residents’ and students’ roles in patient care, power, and responsibility. Considering rotation schedules, internal medicine (IM) clerkship directors have discussed the relative value of weekend vs weekday duty during inpatient rotations, a scheduling topic of interest to students as well, though these conversations are limited by a lack of knowledge regarding admission patterns. Addressing this information gap would inform policy decisions.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is uniquely positioned to address questions about UME clinical experiences nationwide: annually, over 118,000 students representing 97% of US medical schools train at VHA facilities.^2,3 We aim to compare the number and variety of patient encounter opportunities presenting during inpatient VHA IM rotations on weekdays versus weekends to inform policy decisions for UME rotation schedules.

Innovation

The VHA Corporate Data Warehouse will be queried for all admissions, diagnoses, and length of stay on inpatient IM services at the 420 VHA hospitals affiliated with US medical schools from 2016-2026. We will aggregate case data for day of week, floor, hospital, and Veteran Integrated Service Network (VISN), and determine number of admissions by weekday (Monday-Friday) and weekend (Saturday-Sunday). Weekday vs. weekend admission data will be compared using generalized mixed effects models for clustered longitudinal data. Heterogeneity across hospitals and VISNs will be explored to examine unique regional trends.

Results

We have drafted strategies to query and curate relevant datasets, developed a preliminary analysis plan, and await data deployment from VHA data stewards.

Conclusions

We believe this will be the first VHA-wide evaluation of patient encounter trends on IM services to examine potential training experiences for medical students. This will increase understanding of the critical role VHA has in developing the nations’ healthcare workforce, and how patterns of opportunities for clinical education may be distributed over time, informing decisions about rotation schedules to maximize students’ abilities to interact with, learn from, and serve our nation’s veterans

Background

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates an 80-hour weekly work limit for residents.¹ In contrast, decisions regarding undergraduate medical education (UME) are strongly influenced locally, with individual institutions setting academic policy for students. These differences in oversight reflect fundamental differences in residents’ and students’ roles in patient care, power, and responsibility. Considering rotation schedules, internal medicine (IM) clerkship directors have discussed the relative value of weekend vs weekday duty during inpatient rotations, a scheduling topic of interest to students as well, though these conversations are limited by a lack of knowledge regarding admission patterns. Addressing this information gap would inform policy decisions.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is uniquely positioned to address questions about UME clinical experiences nationwide: annually, over 118,000 students representing 97% of US medical schools train at VHA facilities.^2,3 We aim to compare the number and variety of patient encounter opportunities presenting during inpatient VHA IM rotations on weekdays versus weekends to inform policy decisions for UME rotation schedules.

Innovation

The VHA Corporate Data Warehouse will be queried for all admissions, diagnoses, and length of stay on inpatient IM services at the 420 VHA hospitals affiliated with US medical schools from 2016-2026. We will aggregate case data for day of week, floor, hospital, and Veteran Integrated Service Network (VISN), and determine number of admissions by weekday (Monday-Friday) and weekend (Saturday-Sunday). Weekday vs. weekend admission data will be compared using generalized mixed effects models for clustered longitudinal data. Heterogeneity across hospitals and VISNs will be explored to examine unique regional trends.

Results

We have drafted strategies to query and curate relevant datasets, developed a preliminary analysis plan, and await data deployment from VHA data stewards.

Conclusions

We believe this will be the first VHA-wide evaluation of patient encounter trends on IM services to examine potential training experiences for medical students. This will increase understanding of the critical role VHA has in developing the nations’ healthcare workforce, and how patterns of opportunities for clinical education may be distributed over time, informing decisions about rotation schedules to maximize students’ abilities to interact with, learn from, and serve our nation’s veterans