User login
Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
Repetitive primary care screenings may miss depression and anxiety
Routine screening for depression and anxiety at each primary care clinical encounter in order to meet performance metrics could compromise accuracy and clinical care, based on data from more than 380,000 individuals in primary care.
“Prioritizing repetition of intake screening questionnaires at primary care visits may have unintended consequences such as administrative burden, provision of low-value care, and reduced clinical capacity to deliver other, high-value services,” but the accuracy of workflow-based intake screening on subsequent diagnosis has not been explored, wrote Jodi Simon, DrPH, of AllianceChicago, Ill., and colleagues.
In a study published in the Annals of Family Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from screenings performed on 380,057 patients in primary care settings. They examined the accuracy and utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) for depression and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2 (GAD-2) for anxiety.
The data included 1,883,317 screenings with PHQ-2s and 1,573,107 with GAD-2s. Of these, 92.3% of PHQ-2 screenings and 91.4% of GAD-2 screenings indicated low likelihood of depression or anxiety (defined as cumulative scores of 0 or 1). Mean scores for the PHQ-2 and GAD-2 in the study population were 0.29 and 0.35, respectively.
In the current study, 11% of patients had positive PHQ-2 scores (defined as 2 or higher) vs. 47%-53% seen in previous studies and census data.
In an analysis of new diagnoses of depression and anxiety, the researchers found that 42.3% of patients with a new depression diagnosis were not identified on intake screening; they had scores of 0 or 1 on the PHQ-2 in the past 30 days. Similarly, 42.7% of patients with a new anxiety diagnosis had scores of 0 or 1 on the GAD-2 in the past 30 days.
In other words, “Screening only detected risk in 57.7% of patients subsequently diagnosed with depression and 57.3% of patients subsequently diagnosed with anxiety,” the researchers said. This low positivity rate in patients diagnosed within 30 days merits further research, they added.
More studies are needed, but preliminary interviews with patients, clinicians, and staff indicate that time constraints and variation in the administration of questionnaires are among the factors contributing to inaccurate screening, the researchers noted.
The current study results suggest that screenings for anxiety and depression may occur in a perfunctory or inconsistent manner that might compromise accuracy when they are part of the workflow for each clinical visit in order to meet performance metrics, they said. “Ineffective screening may unintentionally detract from clinical care because care teams and patients have less time and cognitive energy to focus on other priorities during busy clinical encounters,” they added.
Alternatively, , the researchers concluded.
The study was funded by the American Medical Association Transformation Initiative. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Routine screening for depression and anxiety at each primary care clinical encounter in order to meet performance metrics could compromise accuracy and clinical care, based on data from more than 380,000 individuals in primary care.
“Prioritizing repetition of intake screening questionnaires at primary care visits may have unintended consequences such as administrative burden, provision of low-value care, and reduced clinical capacity to deliver other, high-value services,” but the accuracy of workflow-based intake screening on subsequent diagnosis has not been explored, wrote Jodi Simon, DrPH, of AllianceChicago, Ill., and colleagues.
In a study published in the Annals of Family Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from screenings performed on 380,057 patients in primary care settings. They examined the accuracy and utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) for depression and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2 (GAD-2) for anxiety.
The data included 1,883,317 screenings with PHQ-2s and 1,573,107 with GAD-2s. Of these, 92.3% of PHQ-2 screenings and 91.4% of GAD-2 screenings indicated low likelihood of depression or anxiety (defined as cumulative scores of 0 or 1). Mean scores for the PHQ-2 and GAD-2 in the study population were 0.29 and 0.35, respectively.
In the current study, 11% of patients had positive PHQ-2 scores (defined as 2 or higher) vs. 47%-53% seen in previous studies and census data.
In an analysis of new diagnoses of depression and anxiety, the researchers found that 42.3% of patients with a new depression diagnosis were not identified on intake screening; they had scores of 0 or 1 on the PHQ-2 in the past 30 days. Similarly, 42.7% of patients with a new anxiety diagnosis had scores of 0 or 1 on the GAD-2 in the past 30 days.
In other words, “Screening only detected risk in 57.7% of patients subsequently diagnosed with depression and 57.3% of patients subsequently diagnosed with anxiety,” the researchers said. This low positivity rate in patients diagnosed within 30 days merits further research, they added.
More studies are needed, but preliminary interviews with patients, clinicians, and staff indicate that time constraints and variation in the administration of questionnaires are among the factors contributing to inaccurate screening, the researchers noted.
The current study results suggest that screenings for anxiety and depression may occur in a perfunctory or inconsistent manner that might compromise accuracy when they are part of the workflow for each clinical visit in order to meet performance metrics, they said. “Ineffective screening may unintentionally detract from clinical care because care teams and patients have less time and cognitive energy to focus on other priorities during busy clinical encounters,” they added.
Alternatively, , the researchers concluded.
The study was funded by the American Medical Association Transformation Initiative. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
Routine screening for depression and anxiety at each primary care clinical encounter in order to meet performance metrics could compromise accuracy and clinical care, based on data from more than 380,000 individuals in primary care.
“Prioritizing repetition of intake screening questionnaires at primary care visits may have unintended consequences such as administrative burden, provision of low-value care, and reduced clinical capacity to deliver other, high-value services,” but the accuracy of workflow-based intake screening on subsequent diagnosis has not been explored, wrote Jodi Simon, DrPH, of AllianceChicago, Ill., and colleagues.
In a study published in the Annals of Family Medicine, the researchers reviewed data from screenings performed on 380,057 patients in primary care settings. They examined the accuracy and utility of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-2) for depression and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 2 (GAD-2) for anxiety.
The data included 1,883,317 screenings with PHQ-2s and 1,573,107 with GAD-2s. Of these, 92.3% of PHQ-2 screenings and 91.4% of GAD-2 screenings indicated low likelihood of depression or anxiety (defined as cumulative scores of 0 or 1). Mean scores for the PHQ-2 and GAD-2 in the study population were 0.29 and 0.35, respectively.
In the current study, 11% of patients had positive PHQ-2 scores (defined as 2 or higher) vs. 47%-53% seen in previous studies and census data.
In an analysis of new diagnoses of depression and anxiety, the researchers found that 42.3% of patients with a new depression diagnosis were not identified on intake screening; they had scores of 0 or 1 on the PHQ-2 in the past 30 days. Similarly, 42.7% of patients with a new anxiety diagnosis had scores of 0 or 1 on the GAD-2 in the past 30 days.
In other words, “Screening only detected risk in 57.7% of patients subsequently diagnosed with depression and 57.3% of patients subsequently diagnosed with anxiety,” the researchers said. This low positivity rate in patients diagnosed within 30 days merits further research, they added.
More studies are needed, but preliminary interviews with patients, clinicians, and staff indicate that time constraints and variation in the administration of questionnaires are among the factors contributing to inaccurate screening, the researchers noted.
The current study results suggest that screenings for anxiety and depression may occur in a perfunctory or inconsistent manner that might compromise accuracy when they are part of the workflow for each clinical visit in order to meet performance metrics, they said. “Ineffective screening may unintentionally detract from clinical care because care teams and patients have less time and cognitive energy to focus on other priorities during busy clinical encounters,” they added.
Alternatively, , the researchers concluded.
The study was funded by the American Medical Association Transformation Initiative. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
FROM THE ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE
Wastewater can signal upswing in flu, RSV
annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.
according to new research reported at anThe analysis of wastewater in Calgary (Alta.) found a “positive correlation” between positivity rates for these three viruses in wastewater and weekly laboratory-confirmed clinical cases and test positivity rates, study investigator Kristine Du, with Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, told this news organization.
Wastewater monitoring of viral activity has become an established tool for COVID-19 pandemic monitoring, providing a leading indicator to cases and hospitalizations. However, less is known about its potential for monitoring endemic respiratory viruses.
The new study shows that wastewater-based surveillance is a “robust and adaptable” tool for community-level surveillance of seasonal respiratory viruses – “one that can complement health care clinical testing because it’s independent from testing biases, and we can actually correlate our cases very well with it,” Ms. Du said during a preconference media briefing.
Tracking community trends
For the study, Ms. Du and colleagues assessed the occurrence of influenza A, influenza B, and RSV RNA in all three wastewater treatment plants in Calgary between March 2022 and April 2023 and its correlation with clinical disease.
They found that viral signals in Calgary’s wastewater for influenza A and B and RSV correlated significantly with weekly confirmed clinical cases in Calgary residents.
Influenza A peaked in Calgary’s wastewater between November and December 2022; influenza B peaked between February and April 2023; and RSV between November 2022 and February 2023.
“Wastewater gives us unbiased, objective, and comprehensive data. It can be used in addition to other testing for assessing the community burden that disease may have, and it is complementary to clinical testing,” Ms. Du said.
Their team, Ms. Du said, is continuing to proactively monitor wastewater for influenza and RSV, as well as other agents of “pandemic potential to make sure we know what could affect humans – and make sure everyone is aware of that.”
Commenting on the research, briefing moderator Belinda Ostrowsky, MD, MPH, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, said, “Wastewater surveillance illustrates how understanding community levels of viral trends can identify hotspots, inform local public health decision-making, and prepare clinicians and hospitals for potential outreach. This topic is particularly timely as we head into the flu and RSV season.”
The study had no commercial funding. Ms. Du and Dr. Ostrowsky report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.
according to new research reported at anThe analysis of wastewater in Calgary (Alta.) found a “positive correlation” between positivity rates for these three viruses in wastewater and weekly laboratory-confirmed clinical cases and test positivity rates, study investigator Kristine Du, with Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, told this news organization.
Wastewater monitoring of viral activity has become an established tool for COVID-19 pandemic monitoring, providing a leading indicator to cases and hospitalizations. However, less is known about its potential for monitoring endemic respiratory viruses.
The new study shows that wastewater-based surveillance is a “robust and adaptable” tool for community-level surveillance of seasonal respiratory viruses – “one that can complement health care clinical testing because it’s independent from testing biases, and we can actually correlate our cases very well with it,” Ms. Du said during a preconference media briefing.
Tracking community trends
For the study, Ms. Du and colleagues assessed the occurrence of influenza A, influenza B, and RSV RNA in all three wastewater treatment plants in Calgary between March 2022 and April 2023 and its correlation with clinical disease.
They found that viral signals in Calgary’s wastewater for influenza A and B and RSV correlated significantly with weekly confirmed clinical cases in Calgary residents.
Influenza A peaked in Calgary’s wastewater between November and December 2022; influenza B peaked between February and April 2023; and RSV between November 2022 and February 2023.
“Wastewater gives us unbiased, objective, and comprehensive data. It can be used in addition to other testing for assessing the community burden that disease may have, and it is complementary to clinical testing,” Ms. Du said.
Their team, Ms. Du said, is continuing to proactively monitor wastewater for influenza and RSV, as well as other agents of “pandemic potential to make sure we know what could affect humans – and make sure everyone is aware of that.”
Commenting on the research, briefing moderator Belinda Ostrowsky, MD, MPH, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, said, “Wastewater surveillance illustrates how understanding community levels of viral trends can identify hotspots, inform local public health decision-making, and prepare clinicians and hospitals for potential outreach. This topic is particularly timely as we head into the flu and RSV season.”
The study had no commercial funding. Ms. Du and Dr. Ostrowsky report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
annual scientific meeting on infectious diseases.
according to new research reported at anThe analysis of wastewater in Calgary (Alta.) found a “positive correlation” between positivity rates for these three viruses in wastewater and weekly laboratory-confirmed clinical cases and test positivity rates, study investigator Kristine Du, with Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, told this news organization.
Wastewater monitoring of viral activity has become an established tool for COVID-19 pandemic monitoring, providing a leading indicator to cases and hospitalizations. However, less is known about its potential for monitoring endemic respiratory viruses.
The new study shows that wastewater-based surveillance is a “robust and adaptable” tool for community-level surveillance of seasonal respiratory viruses – “one that can complement health care clinical testing because it’s independent from testing biases, and we can actually correlate our cases very well with it,” Ms. Du said during a preconference media briefing.
Tracking community trends
For the study, Ms. Du and colleagues assessed the occurrence of influenza A, influenza B, and RSV RNA in all three wastewater treatment plants in Calgary between March 2022 and April 2023 and its correlation with clinical disease.
They found that viral signals in Calgary’s wastewater for influenza A and B and RSV correlated significantly with weekly confirmed clinical cases in Calgary residents.
Influenza A peaked in Calgary’s wastewater between November and December 2022; influenza B peaked between February and April 2023; and RSV between November 2022 and February 2023.
“Wastewater gives us unbiased, objective, and comprehensive data. It can be used in addition to other testing for assessing the community burden that disease may have, and it is complementary to clinical testing,” Ms. Du said.
Their team, Ms. Du said, is continuing to proactively monitor wastewater for influenza and RSV, as well as other agents of “pandemic potential to make sure we know what could affect humans – and make sure everyone is aware of that.”
Commenting on the research, briefing moderator Belinda Ostrowsky, MD, MPH, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, said, “Wastewater surveillance illustrates how understanding community levels of viral trends can identify hotspots, inform local public health decision-making, and prepare clinicians and hospitals for potential outreach. This topic is particularly timely as we head into the flu and RSV season.”
The study had no commercial funding. Ms. Du and Dr. Ostrowsky report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM IDWEEK 2023
Atopic dermatitis: Five things to know
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic inflammatory skin condition that typically affects the face (cheeks), neck, arms, and legs but usually spares the groin and axillary regions. AD usually starts in early infancy but also affects some adults. AD is often associated with elevated levels of immunoglobulin E (IgE). That it is the first disease to present in a series of allergic diseases – including food allergy, asthma, and allergic rhinitis, in order – and has given rise to the “atopic march” theory, which suggests that AD is part of a progression that may lead to subsequent allergic disease at other epithelial barrier surfaces.
1. Essential features of AD are pruritus and eczema
The diagnosis of AD is primarily observational. It is made on the basis of patient and family history, pattern of lesions, morphology, and clinical signs. No genetic features or biomarkers are specific enough to reliably aid in diagnosis or severity assessment. Many individual findings are used to diagnose AD, as summarized by the American Academy of Dermatology based on essential, important, associated, and exclusionary features:
- Essential features (must be present for diagnosis) are pruritus and eczema (acute, subacute, or chronic) with typical morphology and age-specific patterns and chronic or relapsing history.
- Important features (usually seen in AD and support the diagnosis) are early age of onset, atopy (personal/family history, IgE reactivity), and xerosis.
- Associated features (nonspecific but suggestive) are atypical vascular response (e.g., delayed blanch response); keratosis pilaris (and some others); ocular/periorbital changes; other regional findings (e.g., perioral changes); and perifollicular accentuation, lichenification, or prurigo lesions.
- Exclusionary conditions (must be excluded to make the AD diagnosis) are scabies, seborrheic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, ichthyoses, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, psoriasis, photosensitivity dermatoses, immune deficiency diseases, and erythroderma due to other causes.
AD should be differentiated from other red, scaly skin conditions. It is often difficult to separate AD from seborrheic dermatitis in infancy, and the two conditions may overlap in this age group. Particularly if the condition is not responding to therapy, the diagnosis of AD should be re-reviewed and other disorders considered, including more serious nutritional, metabolic, and immunologic conditions in children and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma in adults. Allergic contact dermatitis may be both an alternative diagnosis to AD and an exacerbator of AD in some individuals.
2. Associated comorbidities of AD may exacerbate the condition and lead to other atopic disorders
Reported comorbidities of AD include other atopic or allergic conditions, autoimmune diseases, infections, metabolic conditions, mental health disorders, and cardiovascular disease. Certain aspects of AD, such as chronic pruritus, psychosocial distress, and inflammation, can lead to anxiety, depression, and suicidality. AD is associated with and may predispose to higher risk for other atopic disorders, including asthma, hay fever, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis.
Persons with AD also appear to be at higher risk for infectious diseases. The prevalence of cutaneous and systemic infections in patients with AD is significantly higher than those without AD. Infectious complications can include skin and soft-tissue infections, bacteremia, eczema herpeticum, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, and septic arthritis.
3. Climate change has a profound impact on AD
The incidence of AD has increased over the past several decades, and environmental factors such as climate change have been implicated as a potential mechanism. Climate change–related factors affect the skin’s capacity to maintain homeostasis, leading to various cutaneous diseases. AD, psoriasis, pemphigus, acne vulgaris, melasma, and photoaging are all associated with rising levels of air pollution. Elevated temperatures due to global warming induce disruption of the skin microbiome, thereby affecting AD.
Extreme weather events due to climate change, including floods and wildfires, are implicated in cutaneous injuries, skin infections, and acute worsening of inflammatory skin disorders.
4. The impact and appearance of AD varies in different racial groups
It was once believed that AD was just one single disease affecting people of many different races. More recently, it has been proposed that AD is in fact a group of different diseases. Both epidemiologic and genetic factors may play a role in influencing the main features of AD.
Spongiotic processes such as AD that would be pink or erythematous on white skin are often hypopigmented in individuals with darkly pigmented skin. AD has a higher prevalence and severity in Black and mixed-race populations, probably owing to a combination of environmental and intrinsic factors. Black skin has been shown to have increased transepidermal water loss and lower levels of ceramides, which are important components of the lipid barrier in the stratum corneum.
The American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, along with the Allergy & Asthma Network, are partnering to create Eczema in Skin of Color, a website to aid physicians and patients in recognizing eczema in people with all skin types.
5. New and emerging therapies are poised to improve outcomes with AD treatment
Ruxolitinib cream, a topical Janus kinase (JAK)-1/JAK2 inhibitor, was approved for AD by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in September 2021. The approval was based on results from the Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in AD (TRuE-AD) clinical trial program, which consisted of phase 3 studies that investigated 1,249 patients aged greater than or equal to 12 years with mild to moderate AD (Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 2-3) with a body surface area of 3%-20% (excluding scalp). The 2023 AAD guidelines for topical treatment recommend ruxolitinib cream for adults with mild to moderate AD.
Tralokinumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the interleukin-13 cytokines, which prevents the release of cytokines, chemokines, and IgE. It was approved by the FDA in 2021 for treatment of moderate to severe AD. It is administered by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks. Approval was based on the phase 3 trials ECZTRA 1, 2, and 3, which assessed the efficacy of tralokinumab in 1,934 adults.
Abrocitinib is an oral, once-daily JAK1 inhibitor for treatment of adults living with refractory, moderate to severe AD. FDA approval was based on results of five clinical trials from a large-scale trial program of more than 1,600 patients. Across the trials, abrocitinib demonstrated a consistent safety profile and profound improvements in skin clearance, extent of disease, and severity, as well as rapid improvement in itch after 2 weeks, for some people living with AD vs placebo.
Upadacitinib, another oral JAK1 inhibitor, was approved by the FDA in January 2022 for refractory moderate to severe AD. Approval was based on three double-blind phase 3 trials (Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, AD Up) in which 2,584 patients with moderate to severe AD were randomized to receive oral upadacitinib 15 mg/d and 30 mg/d. In Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, upadacitinib was evaluated as monotherapy; in AD Up, upadacitinib was evaluated in combination with topical corticosteroids.
On the horizon
Baricitinib, an oral JAK1/2 inhibitor, is not yet approved by the FDA for AD. It is, however, approved for moderate to severe AD treatment in the European Union and many other countries. A 2022 review of studies evaluating baricitinib for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults (BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, -AD3, -AD4, -AD5, -AD6) reported that current evidence supports baricitinib, used as monotherapy or in combination with topical corticosteroids, as a safe and effective agent that can be used as an alternative to subcutaneous biologics in adults with moderate to severe AD.
Topical JAK inhibitors
A 2023 systematic review (19 studies, 3,600 participants) reported on several topical JAK inhibitors that are effective for treating AD. It suggests a stronger safety profile and better results, compared with systemic JAK inhibitors. The review focused on topical delgocitinib, tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, cerdulatinib, and ifidancitinib. All agents were effective in treating AD. All of these topical JAK inhibitors had minimal risk for mild to moderate adverse effects.
Biologics
Lebrikizumab was evaluated in a phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. After 16 weeks (280 participants), patients with moderate to severe AD showed a dose-dependent significant improvement in the primary endpoint, compared with placebo. Two phase 3 trials (ADvocate1, ADvocate2) evaluated the safety and efficacy of monotherapy with lebrikizumab in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD.
Nemolizumab, assessed in long-term phase 3 trials of AD-associated pruritus, resulted in clinically meaningful improvements from the beginning of treatment to week 68. Nemolizumab is being evaluated in two identical phase 3 studies (Arcadia 1, Arcadia 2) and a long-term extension study.
Dr. Kim is Professor and Vice Chair of Research in the department of dermatology, as well as Director of the Mark Lebwohl Center for Neuroinflammation and Sensation at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He reported conflicts of interest with 23andMe, Abrax Japan, AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, and KiiRNA Biotech.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic inflammatory skin condition that typically affects the face (cheeks), neck, arms, and legs but usually spares the groin and axillary regions. AD usually starts in early infancy but also affects some adults. AD is often associated with elevated levels of immunoglobulin E (IgE). That it is the first disease to present in a series of allergic diseases – including food allergy, asthma, and allergic rhinitis, in order – and has given rise to the “atopic march” theory, which suggests that AD is part of a progression that may lead to subsequent allergic disease at other epithelial barrier surfaces.
1. Essential features of AD are pruritus and eczema
The diagnosis of AD is primarily observational. It is made on the basis of patient and family history, pattern of lesions, morphology, and clinical signs. No genetic features or biomarkers are specific enough to reliably aid in diagnosis or severity assessment. Many individual findings are used to diagnose AD, as summarized by the American Academy of Dermatology based on essential, important, associated, and exclusionary features:
- Essential features (must be present for diagnosis) are pruritus and eczema (acute, subacute, or chronic) with typical morphology and age-specific patterns and chronic or relapsing history.
- Important features (usually seen in AD and support the diagnosis) are early age of onset, atopy (personal/family history, IgE reactivity), and xerosis.
- Associated features (nonspecific but suggestive) are atypical vascular response (e.g., delayed blanch response); keratosis pilaris (and some others); ocular/periorbital changes; other regional findings (e.g., perioral changes); and perifollicular accentuation, lichenification, or prurigo lesions.
- Exclusionary conditions (must be excluded to make the AD diagnosis) are scabies, seborrheic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, ichthyoses, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, psoriasis, photosensitivity dermatoses, immune deficiency diseases, and erythroderma due to other causes.
AD should be differentiated from other red, scaly skin conditions. It is often difficult to separate AD from seborrheic dermatitis in infancy, and the two conditions may overlap in this age group. Particularly if the condition is not responding to therapy, the diagnosis of AD should be re-reviewed and other disorders considered, including more serious nutritional, metabolic, and immunologic conditions in children and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma in adults. Allergic contact dermatitis may be both an alternative diagnosis to AD and an exacerbator of AD in some individuals.
2. Associated comorbidities of AD may exacerbate the condition and lead to other atopic disorders
Reported comorbidities of AD include other atopic or allergic conditions, autoimmune diseases, infections, metabolic conditions, mental health disorders, and cardiovascular disease. Certain aspects of AD, such as chronic pruritus, psychosocial distress, and inflammation, can lead to anxiety, depression, and suicidality. AD is associated with and may predispose to higher risk for other atopic disorders, including asthma, hay fever, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis.
Persons with AD also appear to be at higher risk for infectious diseases. The prevalence of cutaneous and systemic infections in patients with AD is significantly higher than those without AD. Infectious complications can include skin and soft-tissue infections, bacteremia, eczema herpeticum, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, and septic arthritis.
3. Climate change has a profound impact on AD
The incidence of AD has increased over the past several decades, and environmental factors such as climate change have been implicated as a potential mechanism. Climate change–related factors affect the skin’s capacity to maintain homeostasis, leading to various cutaneous diseases. AD, psoriasis, pemphigus, acne vulgaris, melasma, and photoaging are all associated with rising levels of air pollution. Elevated temperatures due to global warming induce disruption of the skin microbiome, thereby affecting AD.
Extreme weather events due to climate change, including floods and wildfires, are implicated in cutaneous injuries, skin infections, and acute worsening of inflammatory skin disorders.
4. The impact and appearance of AD varies in different racial groups
It was once believed that AD was just one single disease affecting people of many different races. More recently, it has been proposed that AD is in fact a group of different diseases. Both epidemiologic and genetic factors may play a role in influencing the main features of AD.
Spongiotic processes such as AD that would be pink or erythematous on white skin are often hypopigmented in individuals with darkly pigmented skin. AD has a higher prevalence and severity in Black and mixed-race populations, probably owing to a combination of environmental and intrinsic factors. Black skin has been shown to have increased transepidermal water loss and lower levels of ceramides, which are important components of the lipid barrier in the stratum corneum.
The American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, along with the Allergy & Asthma Network, are partnering to create Eczema in Skin of Color, a website to aid physicians and patients in recognizing eczema in people with all skin types.
5. New and emerging therapies are poised to improve outcomes with AD treatment
Ruxolitinib cream, a topical Janus kinase (JAK)-1/JAK2 inhibitor, was approved for AD by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in September 2021. The approval was based on results from the Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in AD (TRuE-AD) clinical trial program, which consisted of phase 3 studies that investigated 1,249 patients aged greater than or equal to 12 years with mild to moderate AD (Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 2-3) with a body surface area of 3%-20% (excluding scalp). The 2023 AAD guidelines for topical treatment recommend ruxolitinib cream for adults with mild to moderate AD.
Tralokinumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the interleukin-13 cytokines, which prevents the release of cytokines, chemokines, and IgE. It was approved by the FDA in 2021 for treatment of moderate to severe AD. It is administered by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks. Approval was based on the phase 3 trials ECZTRA 1, 2, and 3, which assessed the efficacy of tralokinumab in 1,934 adults.
Abrocitinib is an oral, once-daily JAK1 inhibitor for treatment of adults living with refractory, moderate to severe AD. FDA approval was based on results of five clinical trials from a large-scale trial program of more than 1,600 patients. Across the trials, abrocitinib demonstrated a consistent safety profile and profound improvements in skin clearance, extent of disease, and severity, as well as rapid improvement in itch after 2 weeks, for some people living with AD vs placebo.
Upadacitinib, another oral JAK1 inhibitor, was approved by the FDA in January 2022 for refractory moderate to severe AD. Approval was based on three double-blind phase 3 trials (Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, AD Up) in which 2,584 patients with moderate to severe AD were randomized to receive oral upadacitinib 15 mg/d and 30 mg/d. In Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, upadacitinib was evaluated as monotherapy; in AD Up, upadacitinib was evaluated in combination with topical corticosteroids.
On the horizon
Baricitinib, an oral JAK1/2 inhibitor, is not yet approved by the FDA for AD. It is, however, approved for moderate to severe AD treatment in the European Union and many other countries. A 2022 review of studies evaluating baricitinib for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults (BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, -AD3, -AD4, -AD5, -AD6) reported that current evidence supports baricitinib, used as monotherapy or in combination with topical corticosteroids, as a safe and effective agent that can be used as an alternative to subcutaneous biologics in adults with moderate to severe AD.
Topical JAK inhibitors
A 2023 systematic review (19 studies, 3,600 participants) reported on several topical JAK inhibitors that are effective for treating AD. It suggests a stronger safety profile and better results, compared with systemic JAK inhibitors. The review focused on topical delgocitinib, tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, cerdulatinib, and ifidancitinib. All agents were effective in treating AD. All of these topical JAK inhibitors had minimal risk for mild to moderate adverse effects.
Biologics
Lebrikizumab was evaluated in a phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. After 16 weeks (280 participants), patients with moderate to severe AD showed a dose-dependent significant improvement in the primary endpoint, compared with placebo. Two phase 3 trials (ADvocate1, ADvocate2) evaluated the safety and efficacy of monotherapy with lebrikizumab in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD.
Nemolizumab, assessed in long-term phase 3 trials of AD-associated pruritus, resulted in clinically meaningful improvements from the beginning of treatment to week 68. Nemolizumab is being evaluated in two identical phase 3 studies (Arcadia 1, Arcadia 2) and a long-term extension study.
Dr. Kim is Professor and Vice Chair of Research in the department of dermatology, as well as Director of the Mark Lebwohl Center for Neuroinflammation and Sensation at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He reported conflicts of interest with 23andMe, Abrax Japan, AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, and KiiRNA Biotech.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic inflammatory skin condition that typically affects the face (cheeks), neck, arms, and legs but usually spares the groin and axillary regions. AD usually starts in early infancy but also affects some adults. AD is often associated with elevated levels of immunoglobulin E (IgE). That it is the first disease to present in a series of allergic diseases – including food allergy, asthma, and allergic rhinitis, in order – and has given rise to the “atopic march” theory, which suggests that AD is part of a progression that may lead to subsequent allergic disease at other epithelial barrier surfaces.
1. Essential features of AD are pruritus and eczema
The diagnosis of AD is primarily observational. It is made on the basis of patient and family history, pattern of lesions, morphology, and clinical signs. No genetic features or biomarkers are specific enough to reliably aid in diagnosis or severity assessment. Many individual findings are used to diagnose AD, as summarized by the American Academy of Dermatology based on essential, important, associated, and exclusionary features:
- Essential features (must be present for diagnosis) are pruritus and eczema (acute, subacute, or chronic) with typical morphology and age-specific patterns and chronic or relapsing history.
- Important features (usually seen in AD and support the diagnosis) are early age of onset, atopy (personal/family history, IgE reactivity), and xerosis.
- Associated features (nonspecific but suggestive) are atypical vascular response (e.g., delayed blanch response); keratosis pilaris (and some others); ocular/periorbital changes; other regional findings (e.g., perioral changes); and perifollicular accentuation, lichenification, or prurigo lesions.
- Exclusionary conditions (must be excluded to make the AD diagnosis) are scabies, seborrheic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, ichthyoses, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, psoriasis, photosensitivity dermatoses, immune deficiency diseases, and erythroderma due to other causes.
AD should be differentiated from other red, scaly skin conditions. It is often difficult to separate AD from seborrheic dermatitis in infancy, and the two conditions may overlap in this age group. Particularly if the condition is not responding to therapy, the diagnosis of AD should be re-reviewed and other disorders considered, including more serious nutritional, metabolic, and immunologic conditions in children and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma in adults. Allergic contact dermatitis may be both an alternative diagnosis to AD and an exacerbator of AD in some individuals.
2. Associated comorbidities of AD may exacerbate the condition and lead to other atopic disorders
Reported comorbidities of AD include other atopic or allergic conditions, autoimmune diseases, infections, metabolic conditions, mental health disorders, and cardiovascular disease. Certain aspects of AD, such as chronic pruritus, psychosocial distress, and inflammation, can lead to anxiety, depression, and suicidality. AD is associated with and may predispose to higher risk for other atopic disorders, including asthma, hay fever, food allergy, and eosinophilic esophagitis.
Persons with AD also appear to be at higher risk for infectious diseases. The prevalence of cutaneous and systemic infections in patients with AD is significantly higher than those without AD. Infectious complications can include skin and soft-tissue infections, bacteremia, eczema herpeticum, osteomyelitis, endocarditis, and septic arthritis.
3. Climate change has a profound impact on AD
The incidence of AD has increased over the past several decades, and environmental factors such as climate change have been implicated as a potential mechanism. Climate change–related factors affect the skin’s capacity to maintain homeostasis, leading to various cutaneous diseases. AD, psoriasis, pemphigus, acne vulgaris, melasma, and photoaging are all associated with rising levels of air pollution. Elevated temperatures due to global warming induce disruption of the skin microbiome, thereby affecting AD.
Extreme weather events due to climate change, including floods and wildfires, are implicated in cutaneous injuries, skin infections, and acute worsening of inflammatory skin disorders.
4. The impact and appearance of AD varies in different racial groups
It was once believed that AD was just one single disease affecting people of many different races. More recently, it has been proposed that AD is in fact a group of different diseases. Both epidemiologic and genetic factors may play a role in influencing the main features of AD.
Spongiotic processes such as AD that would be pink or erythematous on white skin are often hypopigmented in individuals with darkly pigmented skin. AD has a higher prevalence and severity in Black and mixed-race populations, probably owing to a combination of environmental and intrinsic factors. Black skin has been shown to have increased transepidermal water loss and lower levels of ceramides, which are important components of the lipid barrier in the stratum corneum.
The American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, along with the Allergy & Asthma Network, are partnering to create Eczema in Skin of Color, a website to aid physicians and patients in recognizing eczema in people with all skin types.
5. New and emerging therapies are poised to improve outcomes with AD treatment
Ruxolitinib cream, a topical Janus kinase (JAK)-1/JAK2 inhibitor, was approved for AD by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in September 2021. The approval was based on results from the Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in AD (TRuE-AD) clinical trial program, which consisted of phase 3 studies that investigated 1,249 patients aged greater than or equal to 12 years with mild to moderate AD (Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 2-3) with a body surface area of 3%-20% (excluding scalp). The 2023 AAD guidelines for topical treatment recommend ruxolitinib cream for adults with mild to moderate AD.
Tralokinumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits the interleukin-13 cytokines, which prevents the release of cytokines, chemokines, and IgE. It was approved by the FDA in 2021 for treatment of moderate to severe AD. It is administered by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks. Approval was based on the phase 3 trials ECZTRA 1, 2, and 3, which assessed the efficacy of tralokinumab in 1,934 adults.
Abrocitinib is an oral, once-daily JAK1 inhibitor for treatment of adults living with refractory, moderate to severe AD. FDA approval was based on results of five clinical trials from a large-scale trial program of more than 1,600 patients. Across the trials, abrocitinib demonstrated a consistent safety profile and profound improvements in skin clearance, extent of disease, and severity, as well as rapid improvement in itch after 2 weeks, for some people living with AD vs placebo.
Upadacitinib, another oral JAK1 inhibitor, was approved by the FDA in January 2022 for refractory moderate to severe AD. Approval was based on three double-blind phase 3 trials (Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, AD Up) in which 2,584 patients with moderate to severe AD were randomized to receive oral upadacitinib 15 mg/d and 30 mg/d. In Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, upadacitinib was evaluated as monotherapy; in AD Up, upadacitinib was evaluated in combination with topical corticosteroids.
On the horizon
Baricitinib, an oral JAK1/2 inhibitor, is not yet approved by the FDA for AD. It is, however, approved for moderate to severe AD treatment in the European Union and many other countries. A 2022 review of studies evaluating baricitinib for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults (BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, -AD3, -AD4, -AD5, -AD6) reported that current evidence supports baricitinib, used as monotherapy or in combination with topical corticosteroids, as a safe and effective agent that can be used as an alternative to subcutaneous biologics in adults with moderate to severe AD.
Topical JAK inhibitors
A 2023 systematic review (19 studies, 3,600 participants) reported on several topical JAK inhibitors that are effective for treating AD. It suggests a stronger safety profile and better results, compared with systemic JAK inhibitors. The review focused on topical delgocitinib, tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, cerdulatinib, and ifidancitinib. All agents were effective in treating AD. All of these topical JAK inhibitors had minimal risk for mild to moderate adverse effects.
Biologics
Lebrikizumab was evaluated in a phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. After 16 weeks (280 participants), patients with moderate to severe AD showed a dose-dependent significant improvement in the primary endpoint, compared with placebo. Two phase 3 trials (ADvocate1, ADvocate2) evaluated the safety and efficacy of monotherapy with lebrikizumab in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD.
Nemolizumab, assessed in long-term phase 3 trials of AD-associated pruritus, resulted in clinically meaningful improvements from the beginning of treatment to week 68. Nemolizumab is being evaluated in two identical phase 3 studies (Arcadia 1, Arcadia 2) and a long-term extension study.
Dr. Kim is Professor and Vice Chair of Research in the department of dermatology, as well as Director of the Mark Lebwohl Center for Neuroinflammation and Sensation at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He reported conflicts of interest with 23andMe, Abrax Japan, AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, and KiiRNA Biotech.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
New guidelines for determining brain death released
The consensus practice guideline on brain death, also known as death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC), was developed by a panel of 20 experts from different specialties, institutions, and medical societies.
As with previous guidelines, the updated version stipulates that brain death should be declared when a patient with a known cause of catastrophic brain injury has permanent loss of function of the brain, including the brain stem, which results in coma, brain stem areflexia, and apnea in the setting of an adequate stimulus.
But the updated version also clarifies questions on neurological examinations and apnea testing and offers new guidance on pre-evaluation targets for blood pressure and body temperature and evaluating brain death in patients who are pregnant, are on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or have an injury to the base of the brain.
Also, for the first time, the guidance clarifies that clinicians don’t need to obtain consent before performing a brain death evaluation, unless institutional policy, state laws, or regulations stipulate otherwise.
“The 2023 guidelines will be considered the standard of care in the U.S.,” lead author David M. Greer, MD, chair and chief of neurology, Boston University, and chief of neurology, Boston Medical Center, said in an interview. “Each hospital in the U.S. is responsible for its own policy for BD/DNC determination, and our hope is that they will quickly revise their policies in accordance with this new national standard.”
The guidelines, which are accompanied by a three-page checklist and a free digital app, were published online in Neurology.
Four years in the making
Work on the 85 recommendations in the new report began more than 4 years ago as a collaborative effort by the American Academy of Neurology, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Neurology Society, and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
A lack of high-quality evidence on brain death determination led panelists to devise an evidence-informed formal consensus process to develop the guidelines, which involved three rounds of anonymous voting on each recommendation and the rationales behind them.
The strength of each recommendation was based on the level of consensus reached through voting, with Level A denoting a recommendation that “must” be followed, Level B one that “should” be followed, and Level C one that “may” be followed.
The majority of recommendations received an A or B rating. Only one recommendation, about whether a second clinical exam is needed in adults, garnered a C rating.
In children, the guidelines recommend that clinicians must perform two clinical examinations and two apnea tests 12 hours apart. In adults, only one exam is required. Both of those recommendations were rated Level A. A recommendation for a second exam in adults received the single Level C rating.
A uniform set of guidelines?
The new guidelines replace adult practice guidance published by AAN in 2010 and guideline for infants and children released in 2011 by AAP, CNS, and SCCM, and for the first time combine brain death guidelines for adult and pediatric patients into one document.
“It is important for clinicians to review the new guideline carefully and ensure their hospital brain death guidelines are updated to be consistent with the new guideline in order to prevent inaccurate determinations of death,” guidelines coauthor Ariane Lewis, MD, NYU Langone Health, New York, said in an interview.
The 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) is the legal foundation for the declaration of BD/DNC in the United States, but it only stipulates that brain death determination must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.
There is no single national standard, and states and hospitals are free to adopt their own, which many have done. One goal of the new guidelines was to create a uniform set of guidelines that all institutions follow.
“This is a step toward having a set of guidelines that are accepted by most of the societies and clinical specialties involved in this sort of diagnosis,” that could lead to a national-level policy, Fernando Goldenberg, MD, professor of neurology and director of neuroscience critical care, University of Chicago Medicine, said in an interview.
Dr. Goldenberg was not part of the panel that developed the updated guidelines, but was a coauthor of a consensus statement from the World Brain Death Project in 2020.
Developing a singular global guideline for brain death determination is unlikely, Dr. Goldenberg said. Policies vary widely across the world, and some countries don’t even recognize brain death.
“But this attempts to unify things at the U.S. level, which is very important,” he said.
Permanent vs. irreversible
Dr. Goldenberg said that combining adult and pediatric guidelines into one document will be very helpful for clinicians like him who treat patients from age 16 years and up.
The expanded guidance on apnea testing, recommendations on specific ancillary tests to use or avoid, and inclusion of language stipulating that prior consent is not needed to perform a brain death evaluation are also useful.
He also noted that the section on credentialing and training of clinicians who perform BD/DNC evaluations recognizes advanced practice providers, the first time he recalls seeing these professionals included in brain death guidelines.
However, the panel’s decision to use the term “permanent” to describe loss of brain function instead of “irreversible” gave Dr. Goldenberg pause.
The UDDA provides that an individual is declared legally dead when “circulatory and respiratory functions irreversibly stop; or all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, irreversibly stop.”
Earlier in October, the American College of Physicians released a position paper on cardiorespiratory death determination that called for a revision of the UDDA language.
The ACP suggested that “irreversibly” be replaced with “permanently” with regard to the cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, but that “irreversible” be kept in the description of brain death.
“Permanent means that there is damage that is potentially reversible and irreversible means that the damage is so profound, it cannot be reversed even if an attempt to do so is performed,” Dr. Goldenberg said.
Even though the World Brain Death Project, on which he worked, also used “permanent” to describe brain function loss, Dr. Goldenberg said he aligns with ACP’s position.
“The understanding of brain death is that the damage is so profound, it is irreversible, even if you were to try,” he said. “Therefore, I think that the most appropriate term for brain death should be irreversible as opposed to permanent.”
The report was funded by the American Academy of Neurology. Dr. Greer has received travel funding from Boston University; serves as editor-in-chief for Seminars in Neurology; receives publishing royalties for 50 Studies Every Neurologist Should Know and Successful Leadership in Academic Medicine; has received honoraria from AAN; has received research funding from Becton, Dickinson, and Company; and has served as expert witness in legal proceedings. Dr. Lewis has received honoraria from AAN and Neurodiem, serves as Neurology deputy editor of disputes and debates, and serves as deputy editor of seminars in Neurology. Dr. Goldenberg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The consensus practice guideline on brain death, also known as death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC), was developed by a panel of 20 experts from different specialties, institutions, and medical societies.
As with previous guidelines, the updated version stipulates that brain death should be declared when a patient with a known cause of catastrophic brain injury has permanent loss of function of the brain, including the brain stem, which results in coma, brain stem areflexia, and apnea in the setting of an adequate stimulus.
But the updated version also clarifies questions on neurological examinations and apnea testing and offers new guidance on pre-evaluation targets for blood pressure and body temperature and evaluating brain death in patients who are pregnant, are on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or have an injury to the base of the brain.
Also, for the first time, the guidance clarifies that clinicians don’t need to obtain consent before performing a brain death evaluation, unless institutional policy, state laws, or regulations stipulate otherwise.
“The 2023 guidelines will be considered the standard of care in the U.S.,” lead author David M. Greer, MD, chair and chief of neurology, Boston University, and chief of neurology, Boston Medical Center, said in an interview. “Each hospital in the U.S. is responsible for its own policy for BD/DNC determination, and our hope is that they will quickly revise their policies in accordance with this new national standard.”
The guidelines, which are accompanied by a three-page checklist and a free digital app, were published online in Neurology.
Four years in the making
Work on the 85 recommendations in the new report began more than 4 years ago as a collaborative effort by the American Academy of Neurology, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Neurology Society, and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
A lack of high-quality evidence on brain death determination led panelists to devise an evidence-informed formal consensus process to develop the guidelines, which involved three rounds of anonymous voting on each recommendation and the rationales behind them.
The strength of each recommendation was based on the level of consensus reached through voting, with Level A denoting a recommendation that “must” be followed, Level B one that “should” be followed, and Level C one that “may” be followed.
The majority of recommendations received an A or B rating. Only one recommendation, about whether a second clinical exam is needed in adults, garnered a C rating.
In children, the guidelines recommend that clinicians must perform two clinical examinations and two apnea tests 12 hours apart. In adults, only one exam is required. Both of those recommendations were rated Level A. A recommendation for a second exam in adults received the single Level C rating.
A uniform set of guidelines?
The new guidelines replace adult practice guidance published by AAN in 2010 and guideline for infants and children released in 2011 by AAP, CNS, and SCCM, and for the first time combine brain death guidelines for adult and pediatric patients into one document.
“It is important for clinicians to review the new guideline carefully and ensure their hospital brain death guidelines are updated to be consistent with the new guideline in order to prevent inaccurate determinations of death,” guidelines coauthor Ariane Lewis, MD, NYU Langone Health, New York, said in an interview.
The 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) is the legal foundation for the declaration of BD/DNC in the United States, but it only stipulates that brain death determination must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.
There is no single national standard, and states and hospitals are free to adopt their own, which many have done. One goal of the new guidelines was to create a uniform set of guidelines that all institutions follow.
“This is a step toward having a set of guidelines that are accepted by most of the societies and clinical specialties involved in this sort of diagnosis,” that could lead to a national-level policy, Fernando Goldenberg, MD, professor of neurology and director of neuroscience critical care, University of Chicago Medicine, said in an interview.
Dr. Goldenberg was not part of the panel that developed the updated guidelines, but was a coauthor of a consensus statement from the World Brain Death Project in 2020.
Developing a singular global guideline for brain death determination is unlikely, Dr. Goldenberg said. Policies vary widely across the world, and some countries don’t even recognize brain death.
“But this attempts to unify things at the U.S. level, which is very important,” he said.
Permanent vs. irreversible
Dr. Goldenberg said that combining adult and pediatric guidelines into one document will be very helpful for clinicians like him who treat patients from age 16 years and up.
The expanded guidance on apnea testing, recommendations on specific ancillary tests to use or avoid, and inclusion of language stipulating that prior consent is not needed to perform a brain death evaluation are also useful.
He also noted that the section on credentialing and training of clinicians who perform BD/DNC evaluations recognizes advanced practice providers, the first time he recalls seeing these professionals included in brain death guidelines.
However, the panel’s decision to use the term “permanent” to describe loss of brain function instead of “irreversible” gave Dr. Goldenberg pause.
The UDDA provides that an individual is declared legally dead when “circulatory and respiratory functions irreversibly stop; or all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, irreversibly stop.”
Earlier in October, the American College of Physicians released a position paper on cardiorespiratory death determination that called for a revision of the UDDA language.
The ACP suggested that “irreversibly” be replaced with “permanently” with regard to the cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, but that “irreversible” be kept in the description of brain death.
“Permanent means that there is damage that is potentially reversible and irreversible means that the damage is so profound, it cannot be reversed even if an attempt to do so is performed,” Dr. Goldenberg said.
Even though the World Brain Death Project, on which he worked, also used “permanent” to describe brain function loss, Dr. Goldenberg said he aligns with ACP’s position.
“The understanding of brain death is that the damage is so profound, it is irreversible, even if you were to try,” he said. “Therefore, I think that the most appropriate term for brain death should be irreversible as opposed to permanent.”
The report was funded by the American Academy of Neurology. Dr. Greer has received travel funding from Boston University; serves as editor-in-chief for Seminars in Neurology; receives publishing royalties for 50 Studies Every Neurologist Should Know and Successful Leadership in Academic Medicine; has received honoraria from AAN; has received research funding from Becton, Dickinson, and Company; and has served as expert witness in legal proceedings. Dr. Lewis has received honoraria from AAN and Neurodiem, serves as Neurology deputy editor of disputes and debates, and serves as deputy editor of seminars in Neurology. Dr. Goldenberg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The consensus practice guideline on brain death, also known as death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC), was developed by a panel of 20 experts from different specialties, institutions, and medical societies.
As with previous guidelines, the updated version stipulates that brain death should be declared when a patient with a known cause of catastrophic brain injury has permanent loss of function of the brain, including the brain stem, which results in coma, brain stem areflexia, and apnea in the setting of an adequate stimulus.
But the updated version also clarifies questions on neurological examinations and apnea testing and offers new guidance on pre-evaluation targets for blood pressure and body temperature and evaluating brain death in patients who are pregnant, are on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or have an injury to the base of the brain.
Also, for the first time, the guidance clarifies that clinicians don’t need to obtain consent before performing a brain death evaluation, unless institutional policy, state laws, or regulations stipulate otherwise.
“The 2023 guidelines will be considered the standard of care in the U.S.,” lead author David M. Greer, MD, chair and chief of neurology, Boston University, and chief of neurology, Boston Medical Center, said in an interview. “Each hospital in the U.S. is responsible for its own policy for BD/DNC determination, and our hope is that they will quickly revise their policies in accordance with this new national standard.”
The guidelines, which are accompanied by a three-page checklist and a free digital app, were published online in Neurology.
Four years in the making
Work on the 85 recommendations in the new report began more than 4 years ago as a collaborative effort by the American Academy of Neurology, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Child Neurology Society, and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.
A lack of high-quality evidence on brain death determination led panelists to devise an evidence-informed formal consensus process to develop the guidelines, which involved three rounds of anonymous voting on each recommendation and the rationales behind them.
The strength of each recommendation was based on the level of consensus reached through voting, with Level A denoting a recommendation that “must” be followed, Level B one that “should” be followed, and Level C one that “may” be followed.
The majority of recommendations received an A or B rating. Only one recommendation, about whether a second clinical exam is needed in adults, garnered a C rating.
In children, the guidelines recommend that clinicians must perform two clinical examinations and two apnea tests 12 hours apart. In adults, only one exam is required. Both of those recommendations were rated Level A. A recommendation for a second exam in adults received the single Level C rating.
A uniform set of guidelines?
The new guidelines replace adult practice guidance published by AAN in 2010 and guideline for infants and children released in 2011 by AAP, CNS, and SCCM, and for the first time combine brain death guidelines for adult and pediatric patients into one document.
“It is important for clinicians to review the new guideline carefully and ensure their hospital brain death guidelines are updated to be consistent with the new guideline in order to prevent inaccurate determinations of death,” guidelines coauthor Ariane Lewis, MD, NYU Langone Health, New York, said in an interview.
The 1981 Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) is the legal foundation for the declaration of BD/DNC in the United States, but it only stipulates that brain death determination must be made in accordance with accepted medical standards.
There is no single national standard, and states and hospitals are free to adopt their own, which many have done. One goal of the new guidelines was to create a uniform set of guidelines that all institutions follow.
“This is a step toward having a set of guidelines that are accepted by most of the societies and clinical specialties involved in this sort of diagnosis,” that could lead to a national-level policy, Fernando Goldenberg, MD, professor of neurology and director of neuroscience critical care, University of Chicago Medicine, said in an interview.
Dr. Goldenberg was not part of the panel that developed the updated guidelines, but was a coauthor of a consensus statement from the World Brain Death Project in 2020.
Developing a singular global guideline for brain death determination is unlikely, Dr. Goldenberg said. Policies vary widely across the world, and some countries don’t even recognize brain death.
“But this attempts to unify things at the U.S. level, which is very important,” he said.
Permanent vs. irreversible
Dr. Goldenberg said that combining adult and pediatric guidelines into one document will be very helpful for clinicians like him who treat patients from age 16 years and up.
The expanded guidance on apnea testing, recommendations on specific ancillary tests to use or avoid, and inclusion of language stipulating that prior consent is not needed to perform a brain death evaluation are also useful.
He also noted that the section on credentialing and training of clinicians who perform BD/DNC evaluations recognizes advanced practice providers, the first time he recalls seeing these professionals included in brain death guidelines.
However, the panel’s decision to use the term “permanent” to describe loss of brain function instead of “irreversible” gave Dr. Goldenberg pause.
The UDDA provides that an individual is declared legally dead when “circulatory and respiratory functions irreversibly stop; or all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, irreversibly stop.”
Earlier in October, the American College of Physicians released a position paper on cardiorespiratory death determination that called for a revision of the UDDA language.
The ACP suggested that “irreversibly” be replaced with “permanently” with regard to the cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions, but that “irreversible” be kept in the description of brain death.
“Permanent means that there is damage that is potentially reversible and irreversible means that the damage is so profound, it cannot be reversed even if an attempt to do so is performed,” Dr. Goldenberg said.
Even though the World Brain Death Project, on which he worked, also used “permanent” to describe brain function loss, Dr. Goldenberg said he aligns with ACP’s position.
“The understanding of brain death is that the damage is so profound, it is irreversible, even if you were to try,” he said. “Therefore, I think that the most appropriate term for brain death should be irreversible as opposed to permanent.”
The report was funded by the American Academy of Neurology. Dr. Greer has received travel funding from Boston University; serves as editor-in-chief for Seminars in Neurology; receives publishing royalties for 50 Studies Every Neurologist Should Know and Successful Leadership in Academic Medicine; has received honoraria from AAN; has received research funding from Becton, Dickinson, and Company; and has served as expert witness in legal proceedings. Dr. Lewis has received honoraria from AAN and Neurodiem, serves as Neurology deputy editor of disputes and debates, and serves as deputy editor of seminars in Neurology. Dr. Goldenberg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM NEUROLOGY
3-D stereophotogrammetry helps detect progression of craniofacial morphea
TOPLINE:
over time.
METHODOLOGY:
- Existing tools that detect disease progression in patients with CM are limited.
- In a prospective cohort study, researchers evaluated the use of 3-D stereophotogrammetry, a noninvasive, radiation-free imaging modality, to detect disease progression in 27 consecutive patients with CM seen at Boston Children’s Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital from April 1, 2019, to March 1, 2023.
- After clinical and 3-D stereophotogrammetry assessments were performed at 2- to 12-month intervals, the 3-D images were rated by an expert (a board-certified plastic craniofacial surgeon) and a nonexpert (a board-certified dermatologist) as demonstrating progression or no progression.
- Kappa coefficients were used to calculate inter-rater reliability.
TAKEAWAY:
- Most of the study participants (73%) were female, their median age was 14 years (range, 5-40 years), and each underwent 3-D stereophotogrammetry imaging at least two times spaced a median of 3 months apart.
- On the basis of clinical assessments during the 48-month study period, 10 patients (37%) experienced progression of their disease.
- 3-D stereophotogrammetry not only corroborated clinical impressions of disease progression with strong inter-rater reliability (kappa = 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.99), but it also detected occult progression of asymmetry not noted on clinical examination in three additional patients.
- In subgroup analyses, assessment of 3-D images demonstrated substantial to near-perfect inter-rater reliability in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types IV-VI.
IN PRACTICE:
“Further work is necessary to validate this measure in a larger cohort and to guide its incorporation into medical decision-making for patients with CM,” the researchers wrote.
SOURCE:
Katharina S. Shaw, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, led the research. The study was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The sample was small, and a criterion standard for assessing CM was lacking.
DISCLOSURES:
The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
over time.
METHODOLOGY:
- Existing tools that detect disease progression in patients with CM are limited.
- In a prospective cohort study, researchers evaluated the use of 3-D stereophotogrammetry, a noninvasive, radiation-free imaging modality, to detect disease progression in 27 consecutive patients with CM seen at Boston Children’s Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital from April 1, 2019, to March 1, 2023.
- After clinical and 3-D stereophotogrammetry assessments were performed at 2- to 12-month intervals, the 3-D images were rated by an expert (a board-certified plastic craniofacial surgeon) and a nonexpert (a board-certified dermatologist) as demonstrating progression or no progression.
- Kappa coefficients were used to calculate inter-rater reliability.
TAKEAWAY:
- Most of the study participants (73%) were female, their median age was 14 years (range, 5-40 years), and each underwent 3-D stereophotogrammetry imaging at least two times spaced a median of 3 months apart.
- On the basis of clinical assessments during the 48-month study period, 10 patients (37%) experienced progression of their disease.
- 3-D stereophotogrammetry not only corroborated clinical impressions of disease progression with strong inter-rater reliability (kappa = 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.99), but it also detected occult progression of asymmetry not noted on clinical examination in three additional patients.
- In subgroup analyses, assessment of 3-D images demonstrated substantial to near-perfect inter-rater reliability in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types IV-VI.
IN PRACTICE:
“Further work is necessary to validate this measure in a larger cohort and to guide its incorporation into medical decision-making for patients with CM,” the researchers wrote.
SOURCE:
Katharina S. Shaw, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, led the research. The study was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The sample was small, and a criterion standard for assessing CM was lacking.
DISCLOSURES:
The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
over time.
METHODOLOGY:
- Existing tools that detect disease progression in patients with CM are limited.
- In a prospective cohort study, researchers evaluated the use of 3-D stereophotogrammetry, a noninvasive, radiation-free imaging modality, to detect disease progression in 27 consecutive patients with CM seen at Boston Children’s Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital from April 1, 2019, to March 1, 2023.
- After clinical and 3-D stereophotogrammetry assessments were performed at 2- to 12-month intervals, the 3-D images were rated by an expert (a board-certified plastic craniofacial surgeon) and a nonexpert (a board-certified dermatologist) as demonstrating progression or no progression.
- Kappa coefficients were used to calculate inter-rater reliability.
TAKEAWAY:
- Most of the study participants (73%) were female, their median age was 14 years (range, 5-40 years), and each underwent 3-D stereophotogrammetry imaging at least two times spaced a median of 3 months apart.
- On the basis of clinical assessments during the 48-month study period, 10 patients (37%) experienced progression of their disease.
- 3-D stereophotogrammetry not only corroborated clinical impressions of disease progression with strong inter-rater reliability (kappa = 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.99), but it also detected occult progression of asymmetry not noted on clinical examination in three additional patients.
- In subgroup analyses, assessment of 3-D images demonstrated substantial to near-perfect inter-rater reliability in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types IV-VI.
IN PRACTICE:
“Further work is necessary to validate this measure in a larger cohort and to guide its incorporation into medical decision-making for patients with CM,” the researchers wrote.
SOURCE:
Katharina S. Shaw, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, led the research. The study was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The sample was small, and a criterion standard for assessing CM was lacking.
DISCLOSURES:
The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Pediatric sleep-disordered breathing linked to multilevel risk factors
In the first study evaluating pediatric sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) from both indoor environment and neighborhood perspectives, multilevel risk factors were revealed as being associated with SDB-related symptoms. Beyond known associations with environmental tobacco smoke (ETS),
.Although it has been well known that pediatric SDB affects low socioeconomic status (SES) children disproportionately, the roles of multilevel risk factor drivers including individual health, household SES, indoor exposures to environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and neighborhood characteristics have not been well studied, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. wrote in CHEST Pulmonary.
Pediatric SDB, a known risk factor for many health, neurobehavioral, and functional outcomes, includes habitual snoring and obstructive sleep apnea and may contribute to health disparities. Adenotonsillar hypertrophy and obesity are the most commonly recognized risk factors for SDB in generally healthy school-aged children. A role for other risk factors, however, is suggested by the fact that Black children have a fourfold increased risk for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), compared with White children, unexplained by obesity, and have decreased response to treatment of OSA with adenotonsillectomy, compared with White children. Several studies point in the direction of neighborhood disadvantages as factors in heightened SDB prevalence or severity, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated.
The authors performed cross-sectional analyses on data recorded from 303 children (aged 6-12 years) enrolled in the Environmental Assessment of Sleep Youth (EASY) study from 2018 to 2022. Among them, 39% were Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Spanish origin, 30% were Black or African American, 22% were White, and 11% were other. Maternal education attainment of a high school diploma or less was reported in 27%, and 65% of the sample lived in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Twenty-eight percent of children met criteria for objective SDB (Apnea-Hypopnea Index/Oxygen Desaturation Index ≥ 5/hr). Exposure documentation was informed by caregiver reports, assays of measured settled dust from the child’s bedroom, and neighborhood-level census data from which the Childhood Opportunity Index characterizing neighborhood disadvantage (ND) was derived. The study primary outcome was the SDB-related symptom burden assessed by the OSA-18 questionnaire total score.
Compared with children with no adverse indoor exposures to ETS and pests, children with such exposures had an approximately 4-12 point increase in total OSA-18 scores, and the increase among those with exposure to both ETS and pests was about 20 points (approximately a 1.3 standard deviation increase), Gueye-Ndiaye et al. reported.
In models adjusted for age, sex, minority race, and ethnicity, low maternal education was associated with a 7.55 (95% confidence interval, 3.44-11.66; P < .01) increased OSA-18 score. In models adjusted for sociodemographics including maternal education, history of asthma and allergic rhinitis were associated with a 13.63 (95% CI, 9.44-17.82; P < .01) and a 6.95 (95% CI, 2.62-11.29; P < .02) increased OSA-18 score, respectively. The authors noted that prior Canadian studies have shown OSA to be three times as likely in children with mothers reporting less than a high school education than in children with university educated mothers.
Speculating on the drivers of this association, they noted that the poor air quality due to tobacco smoke and allergen exposures to rodents, mold, and cockroaches are known contributors to asthma symptoms. Despite the differing pathogenesis of OSA and asthma, they suggest overlapping risk factors. Irritants and allergens may exacerbate SDB by stimulating immune responses manifested as adenotonsillar hypertrophy and by amplifying nasopharyngeal inflammation, adversely affecting upper airway patency. While ETS was not common in the sample, it was associated strongly with SDB. Gueye-Ndiaye et al. also showed associations between pest exposure, bedroom dust, and SDB symptoms. The findings, they concluded, support the importance of household- and bedroom-environmental conditions and sleep health.
OSA-18 scores were also elevated by about 7-14 points with allergic rhinitis and asthma, respectively. The findings, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated, underscore that asthma prevention strategies can be leveraged to address SDB disparities. No amplification of pest exposure effects, however, was found for asthma or allergic rhinitis.
“This is an incredibly important study, one that adds to our understanding of the risk factors that contribute to pediatric sleep health disparities,” said assistant professor of pediatrics Anne C. Coates, MD, Tufts University, Boston. “We have previously understood risk factors for sleep-disordered breathing like adenotonsillar hypertrophy, but this adds other elements like environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and home and neighborhood factors,” she told this news organization. “One of the most important takeaways is that beyond the importance of accurate diagnosis, there is the importance of advocating for our patients to ensure that they have the healthiest homes and neighborhoods. We need to inspire our colleagues to be advocates – for example – for pest mitigation, for antismoking policies, for every policy preventing the factors that contribute to the burden of disease.”
Dr. Coates is coauthor of “Advocacy and Health Equity: The Role of the Pediatric Pulmonologist,” currently in press (Clinics in Chest Medicine), and a member of the CHEST Physician Editorial Board.
The authors noted that a study limitation was that the sample was from one geographic area (Boston). Neither the authors nor Dr. Coates listed any conflicts.
In the first study evaluating pediatric sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) from both indoor environment and neighborhood perspectives, multilevel risk factors were revealed as being associated with SDB-related symptoms. Beyond known associations with environmental tobacco smoke (ETS),
.Although it has been well known that pediatric SDB affects low socioeconomic status (SES) children disproportionately, the roles of multilevel risk factor drivers including individual health, household SES, indoor exposures to environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and neighborhood characteristics have not been well studied, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. wrote in CHEST Pulmonary.
Pediatric SDB, a known risk factor for many health, neurobehavioral, and functional outcomes, includes habitual snoring and obstructive sleep apnea and may contribute to health disparities. Adenotonsillar hypertrophy and obesity are the most commonly recognized risk factors for SDB in generally healthy school-aged children. A role for other risk factors, however, is suggested by the fact that Black children have a fourfold increased risk for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), compared with White children, unexplained by obesity, and have decreased response to treatment of OSA with adenotonsillectomy, compared with White children. Several studies point in the direction of neighborhood disadvantages as factors in heightened SDB prevalence or severity, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated.
The authors performed cross-sectional analyses on data recorded from 303 children (aged 6-12 years) enrolled in the Environmental Assessment of Sleep Youth (EASY) study from 2018 to 2022. Among them, 39% were Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Spanish origin, 30% were Black or African American, 22% were White, and 11% were other. Maternal education attainment of a high school diploma or less was reported in 27%, and 65% of the sample lived in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Twenty-eight percent of children met criteria for objective SDB (Apnea-Hypopnea Index/Oxygen Desaturation Index ≥ 5/hr). Exposure documentation was informed by caregiver reports, assays of measured settled dust from the child’s bedroom, and neighborhood-level census data from which the Childhood Opportunity Index characterizing neighborhood disadvantage (ND) was derived. The study primary outcome was the SDB-related symptom burden assessed by the OSA-18 questionnaire total score.
Compared with children with no adverse indoor exposures to ETS and pests, children with such exposures had an approximately 4-12 point increase in total OSA-18 scores, and the increase among those with exposure to both ETS and pests was about 20 points (approximately a 1.3 standard deviation increase), Gueye-Ndiaye et al. reported.
In models adjusted for age, sex, minority race, and ethnicity, low maternal education was associated with a 7.55 (95% confidence interval, 3.44-11.66; P < .01) increased OSA-18 score. In models adjusted for sociodemographics including maternal education, history of asthma and allergic rhinitis were associated with a 13.63 (95% CI, 9.44-17.82; P < .01) and a 6.95 (95% CI, 2.62-11.29; P < .02) increased OSA-18 score, respectively. The authors noted that prior Canadian studies have shown OSA to be three times as likely in children with mothers reporting less than a high school education than in children with university educated mothers.
Speculating on the drivers of this association, they noted that the poor air quality due to tobacco smoke and allergen exposures to rodents, mold, and cockroaches are known contributors to asthma symptoms. Despite the differing pathogenesis of OSA and asthma, they suggest overlapping risk factors. Irritants and allergens may exacerbate SDB by stimulating immune responses manifested as adenotonsillar hypertrophy and by amplifying nasopharyngeal inflammation, adversely affecting upper airway patency. While ETS was not common in the sample, it was associated strongly with SDB. Gueye-Ndiaye et al. also showed associations between pest exposure, bedroom dust, and SDB symptoms. The findings, they concluded, support the importance of household- and bedroom-environmental conditions and sleep health.
OSA-18 scores were also elevated by about 7-14 points with allergic rhinitis and asthma, respectively. The findings, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated, underscore that asthma prevention strategies can be leveraged to address SDB disparities. No amplification of pest exposure effects, however, was found for asthma or allergic rhinitis.
“This is an incredibly important study, one that adds to our understanding of the risk factors that contribute to pediatric sleep health disparities,” said assistant professor of pediatrics Anne C. Coates, MD, Tufts University, Boston. “We have previously understood risk factors for sleep-disordered breathing like adenotonsillar hypertrophy, but this adds other elements like environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and home and neighborhood factors,” she told this news organization. “One of the most important takeaways is that beyond the importance of accurate diagnosis, there is the importance of advocating for our patients to ensure that they have the healthiest homes and neighborhoods. We need to inspire our colleagues to be advocates – for example – for pest mitigation, for antismoking policies, for every policy preventing the factors that contribute to the burden of disease.”
Dr. Coates is coauthor of “Advocacy and Health Equity: The Role of the Pediatric Pulmonologist,” currently in press (Clinics in Chest Medicine), and a member of the CHEST Physician Editorial Board.
The authors noted that a study limitation was that the sample was from one geographic area (Boston). Neither the authors nor Dr. Coates listed any conflicts.
In the first study evaluating pediatric sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) from both indoor environment and neighborhood perspectives, multilevel risk factors were revealed as being associated with SDB-related symptoms. Beyond known associations with environmental tobacco smoke (ETS),
.Although it has been well known that pediatric SDB affects low socioeconomic status (SES) children disproportionately, the roles of multilevel risk factor drivers including individual health, household SES, indoor exposures to environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and neighborhood characteristics have not been well studied, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. wrote in CHEST Pulmonary.
Pediatric SDB, a known risk factor for many health, neurobehavioral, and functional outcomes, includes habitual snoring and obstructive sleep apnea and may contribute to health disparities. Adenotonsillar hypertrophy and obesity are the most commonly recognized risk factors for SDB in generally healthy school-aged children. A role for other risk factors, however, is suggested by the fact that Black children have a fourfold increased risk for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), compared with White children, unexplained by obesity, and have decreased response to treatment of OSA with adenotonsillectomy, compared with White children. Several studies point in the direction of neighborhood disadvantages as factors in heightened SDB prevalence or severity, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated.
The authors performed cross-sectional analyses on data recorded from 303 children (aged 6-12 years) enrolled in the Environmental Assessment of Sleep Youth (EASY) study from 2018 to 2022. Among them, 39% were Hispanic, Latino, Latina, or Spanish origin, 30% were Black or African American, 22% were White, and 11% were other. Maternal education attainment of a high school diploma or less was reported in 27%, and 65% of the sample lived in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Twenty-eight percent of children met criteria for objective SDB (Apnea-Hypopnea Index/Oxygen Desaturation Index ≥ 5/hr). Exposure documentation was informed by caregiver reports, assays of measured settled dust from the child’s bedroom, and neighborhood-level census data from which the Childhood Opportunity Index characterizing neighborhood disadvantage (ND) was derived. The study primary outcome was the SDB-related symptom burden assessed by the OSA-18 questionnaire total score.
Compared with children with no adverse indoor exposures to ETS and pests, children with such exposures had an approximately 4-12 point increase in total OSA-18 scores, and the increase among those with exposure to both ETS and pests was about 20 points (approximately a 1.3 standard deviation increase), Gueye-Ndiaye et al. reported.
In models adjusted for age, sex, minority race, and ethnicity, low maternal education was associated with a 7.55 (95% confidence interval, 3.44-11.66; P < .01) increased OSA-18 score. In models adjusted for sociodemographics including maternal education, history of asthma and allergic rhinitis were associated with a 13.63 (95% CI, 9.44-17.82; P < .01) and a 6.95 (95% CI, 2.62-11.29; P < .02) increased OSA-18 score, respectively. The authors noted that prior Canadian studies have shown OSA to be three times as likely in children with mothers reporting less than a high school education than in children with university educated mothers.
Speculating on the drivers of this association, they noted that the poor air quality due to tobacco smoke and allergen exposures to rodents, mold, and cockroaches are known contributors to asthma symptoms. Despite the differing pathogenesis of OSA and asthma, they suggest overlapping risk factors. Irritants and allergens may exacerbate SDB by stimulating immune responses manifested as adenotonsillar hypertrophy and by amplifying nasopharyngeal inflammation, adversely affecting upper airway patency. While ETS was not common in the sample, it was associated strongly with SDB. Gueye-Ndiaye et al. also showed associations between pest exposure, bedroom dust, and SDB symptoms. The findings, they concluded, support the importance of household- and bedroom-environmental conditions and sleep health.
OSA-18 scores were also elevated by about 7-14 points with allergic rhinitis and asthma, respectively. The findings, Gueye-Ndiaye et al. stated, underscore that asthma prevention strategies can be leveraged to address SDB disparities. No amplification of pest exposure effects, however, was found for asthma or allergic rhinitis.
“This is an incredibly important study, one that adds to our understanding of the risk factors that contribute to pediatric sleep health disparities,” said assistant professor of pediatrics Anne C. Coates, MD, Tufts University, Boston. “We have previously understood risk factors for sleep-disordered breathing like adenotonsillar hypertrophy, but this adds other elements like environmental tobacco smoke, pests, and home and neighborhood factors,” she told this news organization. “One of the most important takeaways is that beyond the importance of accurate diagnosis, there is the importance of advocating for our patients to ensure that they have the healthiest homes and neighborhoods. We need to inspire our colleagues to be advocates – for example – for pest mitigation, for antismoking policies, for every policy preventing the factors that contribute to the burden of disease.”
Dr. Coates is coauthor of “Advocacy and Health Equity: The Role of the Pediatric Pulmonologist,” currently in press (Clinics in Chest Medicine), and a member of the CHEST Physician Editorial Board.
The authors noted that a study limitation was that the sample was from one geographic area (Boston). Neither the authors nor Dr. Coates listed any conflicts.
FROM CHEST PULMONARY
Pediatric psoriasis: Black children, males more likely to have palmoplantar subtype, study finds
TOPLINE:
.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers reviewed data on 330 children and youths aged 0-18 years who had received a primary psoriasis diagnosis and who were seen at an academic pediatric dermatology clinic from 2012 to 2022. Among these patients, 50 cases of palmoplantar psoriasis (PP) were identified by pediatric dermatologists.
- The study population was stratified by race/ethnicity on the basis of self-identification. The cohort included White, Black, and Hispanic/Latino patients, as well as patients who identified as other; 71.5% were White persons, 59.1% were female patients.
- The researchers used a regression analysis to investigate the association between race/ethnicity and PP after controlling for multiple confounding variables, including age and gender.
TAKEAWAY:
- Black children were significantly more likely to have PP than White children (adjusted odds ratio, 6.386; P < .0001). PP was diagnosed in 41.9%, 11.5%, and 8.9% of Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White children, respectively.
- Male gender was also identified as an independent risk factor for PP (aOR, 2.241).
- Nail involvement occurred in significantly more Black and Hispanic/Latino patients than in White patients (53.2%, 50.0%, and 33.9%, respectively).
- Black patients had significantly more palm and sole involvement, compared with the other groups (P < .0001 for both); however, White children had significantly more scalp involvement, compared with the other groups (P = .04).
IN PRACTICE:
“Further research is warranted to better understand the degree to which these associations are affected by racial disparities and environmental factors,” as well as potential genetic associations, the researchers noted.
SOURCE:
The corresponding author on the study was Amy Theos, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. The study was published online in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The findings were limited by the small sample size and incomplete data for some patients.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers reviewed data on 330 children and youths aged 0-18 years who had received a primary psoriasis diagnosis and who were seen at an academic pediatric dermatology clinic from 2012 to 2022. Among these patients, 50 cases of palmoplantar psoriasis (PP) were identified by pediatric dermatologists.
- The study population was stratified by race/ethnicity on the basis of self-identification. The cohort included White, Black, and Hispanic/Latino patients, as well as patients who identified as other; 71.5% were White persons, 59.1% were female patients.
- The researchers used a regression analysis to investigate the association between race/ethnicity and PP after controlling for multiple confounding variables, including age and gender.
TAKEAWAY:
- Black children were significantly more likely to have PP than White children (adjusted odds ratio, 6.386; P < .0001). PP was diagnosed in 41.9%, 11.5%, and 8.9% of Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White children, respectively.
- Male gender was also identified as an independent risk factor for PP (aOR, 2.241).
- Nail involvement occurred in significantly more Black and Hispanic/Latino patients than in White patients (53.2%, 50.0%, and 33.9%, respectively).
- Black patients had significantly more palm and sole involvement, compared with the other groups (P < .0001 for both); however, White children had significantly more scalp involvement, compared with the other groups (P = .04).
IN PRACTICE:
“Further research is warranted to better understand the degree to which these associations are affected by racial disparities and environmental factors,” as well as potential genetic associations, the researchers noted.
SOURCE:
The corresponding author on the study was Amy Theos, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. The study was published online in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The findings were limited by the small sample size and incomplete data for some patients.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers reviewed data on 330 children and youths aged 0-18 years who had received a primary psoriasis diagnosis and who were seen at an academic pediatric dermatology clinic from 2012 to 2022. Among these patients, 50 cases of palmoplantar psoriasis (PP) were identified by pediatric dermatologists.
- The study population was stratified by race/ethnicity on the basis of self-identification. The cohort included White, Black, and Hispanic/Latino patients, as well as patients who identified as other; 71.5% were White persons, 59.1% were female patients.
- The researchers used a regression analysis to investigate the association between race/ethnicity and PP after controlling for multiple confounding variables, including age and gender.
TAKEAWAY:
- Black children were significantly more likely to have PP than White children (adjusted odds ratio, 6.386; P < .0001). PP was diagnosed in 41.9%, 11.5%, and 8.9% of Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White children, respectively.
- Male gender was also identified as an independent risk factor for PP (aOR, 2.241).
- Nail involvement occurred in significantly more Black and Hispanic/Latino patients than in White patients (53.2%, 50.0%, and 33.9%, respectively).
- Black patients had significantly more palm and sole involvement, compared with the other groups (P < .0001 for both); however, White children had significantly more scalp involvement, compared with the other groups (P = .04).
IN PRACTICE:
“Further research is warranted to better understand the degree to which these associations are affected by racial disparities and environmental factors,” as well as potential genetic associations, the researchers noted.
SOURCE:
The corresponding author on the study was Amy Theos, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of Alabama, Birmingham. The study was published online in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The findings were limited by the small sample size and incomplete data for some patients.
DISCLOSURES:
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The influence of social media on adolescents seeking autism diagnoses
A 16-year-old female presents for a self-identified concern around the possibility that she is experiencing an autism spectrum disorder. She relays to the developmental pediatrician that she has been learning a lot about autism on TikTok and through other social media sites, and has become strongly convinced that she meets medical criteria for this disorder.
A careful developmental history via a detailed interview with the mother reveals normal acquisition of early developmental milestones in addition to long-standing well-modulated eye contact felt to be paired fluidly with directed affect and gestures. The teen is described as having been an engaging toddler and preschooler, without restricted interests or repetitive behaviors, and having had no major challenges in grade school with behaviors, friendships, or academics.
During the pandemic, however, the teen became quite isolated. She developed anxiety with depression, and then started having some new repetitive arm movements within the last 12-18 months. In clinic, the teen makes robustly effortful arm-waving movements, which are noted to wane when she becomes more animated and excited during conversation, and to increase when she is less distracted by conversation and more focused on the movements.
She directs affect nicely toward her mother, while avoiding looking in the direction of the examiner until later in the evaluation when she becomes more relaxed. Prosody of speech and intonation are typical, and she describes having a close group of friends with whom she spends quite a bit of time.
The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2 module 3) is used to gather structured observations, and these social presses yield flowing social engagement with the examiner, good understanding of humor, and overall excellent verbal and nonverbal communication skills. The teen describes hypervigilance around the emotions of others, a natural ease in understanding the perspectives of others, and a quick ability to read the energy of a room. She does have some interest in some more obscure online game forums, but her friends do as well, and she otherwise does not have a history of intrusive fixations. A social history reveals past significant verbal abuse in the home by means of her father during her first 11 years of life, which is described as quite traumatic.
After careful and thoughtful consideration (recognizing the known statistics around girls assigned female at birth, as well as nonbinary individuals and minoritized groups being underdiagnosed with autism), the history and observations are not felt to be consistent with autism, but with anxiety within the context of a trauma and stressor-related disorder. Even when accounting for the possibility of “masking,” the teen still does not meet criteria for autism based on history and presentation. The habit movements are not typical of usual stereotypies or of tics (which tend to increase with excitement and tend to have a more effortless quality), and are felt to possibly be functional in origin. Upon gently sharing these conclusions with the teen, she bursts into tears, stating her friends may now accuse her of lying, as she has already been claiming to have autism online and in person at school.
Countering social media diagnoses
This type of scenario is becoming increasingly common, with teens turning online primarily to social media accounts to gain knowledge around various neurologic and mental health conditions. Greater normalization of neurodiversity and greater access to high-quality information about neurodevelopmental differences is certainly progress, though unfortunately some online depictions of these conditions are simply not accurate. Many adolescents are keenly searching for both their personal identity and also a community through which they might feel wholly accepted, after experiencing some level of isolation during the pandemic followed by increased social discomfort in attempting to reintegrate into school life and society.
Connecting the teen with a good-fit therapist and working to replace excessive screen time with exercise, outdoor activities, and in-person engagement with friends and family are also crucial interventions, though they can be incredibly difficult for families to achieve given various patient-specific and societal barriers. The overlap in symptomatology among anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorders is expansive, making it understandable that young people might misjudge their personal experience of life for a neurodevelopmental disorder for which they do not truly meet criteria. Increasing access to therapists well versed in trauma-informed care is a frequently referenced need, highlighted in this case.Another case
In contrast to the case scenario above is that of a 19-year-old female presenting for a formal autism evaluation at the urging of her father, who has had concerns around her severe “shyness” throughout her life. He is concerned that she was not able to obtain a high school diploma despite appearing to have adequate cognitive skills, is currently quite isolated, and does not appear equipped to hold a job at this time. He describes her as having been a very quiet and self-directed young child who greatly benefited from the communication and social scaffolding provided by her slightly older and neurotypical sister. She has generally not had true friends, though she had no behavioral or academic difficulties in school other than seeming aloof and unusually quiet. Atypical social approaches have become more apparent over time, as relationship navigation has become more complex with age. She is noted to have frequent stereotyped hand-to-face movements throughout the evaluation, as well as a flat affect and unusual voice quality. She speaks slowly and softly, and while she does make eye contact, it is less well modulated than would be expected. She is very focused on her cat and online interests during conversation, and tends to give stilted answers to open-ended questions. During the interview portion of the ADOS, she demonstrates little insight into friendships and reports feeling very content on her own, though is open to the idea of relationships in the future and would like to learn how to achieve connections with others. Her father reports she tends to be generally quite blunt and has difficulty understanding humor and others’ perspectives. An autism diagnosis is made with the recommendation of application to Developmental Disability Services, given impaired adaptive skills, as a means of utilizing community-based supports to facilitate eventually obtaining a high school equivalency credential, a job, healthier living habits, and comfortable social outlets.
Discussion
It is crucial for providers to be aware of nuanced presentations of autism spectrum disorders that may have been missed in early childhood when social demands are less complicated, particularly in persons identified as female at birth, nonbinary individuals, and those belonging to minority groups. It is also important to address the widely acknowledged trend of adolescents turning to social media influencers for information around neurodevelopmental conditions, at a time in their lives when social anxiety and self-awareness are generally heightened. For an adolescent, a young social media influencer may feel like a more salient and reliable source of information than an adult with various letters after their name. A respectful relationship between a teen and a thoughtful primary care provider can help gain trust to foster open conversations around their concerns, which can further help determine if a referral to a psychologist or developmental pediatrician for a formal autism assessment is truly warranted, highlighting the need for increased diagnostic capacity for such. While it is certainly important for providers to keep an open mind and to have continued awareness around the concept of late autism diagnoses, it is wise to also be aware of this recent trend among adolescents as providers seek to guide youth toward appropriate therapies and services.
Dr. Roth is a developmental and behavioral pediatrician in Eugene, Ore. She has no conflicts of interest.
A 16-year-old female presents for a self-identified concern around the possibility that she is experiencing an autism spectrum disorder. She relays to the developmental pediatrician that she has been learning a lot about autism on TikTok and through other social media sites, and has become strongly convinced that she meets medical criteria for this disorder.
A careful developmental history via a detailed interview with the mother reveals normal acquisition of early developmental milestones in addition to long-standing well-modulated eye contact felt to be paired fluidly with directed affect and gestures. The teen is described as having been an engaging toddler and preschooler, without restricted interests or repetitive behaviors, and having had no major challenges in grade school with behaviors, friendships, or academics.
During the pandemic, however, the teen became quite isolated. She developed anxiety with depression, and then started having some new repetitive arm movements within the last 12-18 months. In clinic, the teen makes robustly effortful arm-waving movements, which are noted to wane when she becomes more animated and excited during conversation, and to increase when she is less distracted by conversation and more focused on the movements.
She directs affect nicely toward her mother, while avoiding looking in the direction of the examiner until later in the evaluation when she becomes more relaxed. Prosody of speech and intonation are typical, and she describes having a close group of friends with whom she spends quite a bit of time.
The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2 module 3) is used to gather structured observations, and these social presses yield flowing social engagement with the examiner, good understanding of humor, and overall excellent verbal and nonverbal communication skills. The teen describes hypervigilance around the emotions of others, a natural ease in understanding the perspectives of others, and a quick ability to read the energy of a room. She does have some interest in some more obscure online game forums, but her friends do as well, and she otherwise does not have a history of intrusive fixations. A social history reveals past significant verbal abuse in the home by means of her father during her first 11 years of life, which is described as quite traumatic.
After careful and thoughtful consideration (recognizing the known statistics around girls assigned female at birth, as well as nonbinary individuals and minoritized groups being underdiagnosed with autism), the history and observations are not felt to be consistent with autism, but with anxiety within the context of a trauma and stressor-related disorder. Even when accounting for the possibility of “masking,” the teen still does not meet criteria for autism based on history and presentation. The habit movements are not typical of usual stereotypies or of tics (which tend to increase with excitement and tend to have a more effortless quality), and are felt to possibly be functional in origin. Upon gently sharing these conclusions with the teen, she bursts into tears, stating her friends may now accuse her of lying, as she has already been claiming to have autism online and in person at school.
Countering social media diagnoses
This type of scenario is becoming increasingly common, with teens turning online primarily to social media accounts to gain knowledge around various neurologic and mental health conditions. Greater normalization of neurodiversity and greater access to high-quality information about neurodevelopmental differences is certainly progress, though unfortunately some online depictions of these conditions are simply not accurate. Many adolescents are keenly searching for both their personal identity and also a community through which they might feel wholly accepted, after experiencing some level of isolation during the pandemic followed by increased social discomfort in attempting to reintegrate into school life and society.
Connecting the teen with a good-fit therapist and working to replace excessive screen time with exercise, outdoor activities, and in-person engagement with friends and family are also crucial interventions, though they can be incredibly difficult for families to achieve given various patient-specific and societal barriers. The overlap in symptomatology among anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorders is expansive, making it understandable that young people might misjudge their personal experience of life for a neurodevelopmental disorder for which they do not truly meet criteria. Increasing access to therapists well versed in trauma-informed care is a frequently referenced need, highlighted in this case.Another case
In contrast to the case scenario above is that of a 19-year-old female presenting for a formal autism evaluation at the urging of her father, who has had concerns around her severe “shyness” throughout her life. He is concerned that she was not able to obtain a high school diploma despite appearing to have adequate cognitive skills, is currently quite isolated, and does not appear equipped to hold a job at this time. He describes her as having been a very quiet and self-directed young child who greatly benefited from the communication and social scaffolding provided by her slightly older and neurotypical sister. She has generally not had true friends, though she had no behavioral or academic difficulties in school other than seeming aloof and unusually quiet. Atypical social approaches have become more apparent over time, as relationship navigation has become more complex with age. She is noted to have frequent stereotyped hand-to-face movements throughout the evaluation, as well as a flat affect and unusual voice quality. She speaks slowly and softly, and while she does make eye contact, it is less well modulated than would be expected. She is very focused on her cat and online interests during conversation, and tends to give stilted answers to open-ended questions. During the interview portion of the ADOS, she demonstrates little insight into friendships and reports feeling very content on her own, though is open to the idea of relationships in the future and would like to learn how to achieve connections with others. Her father reports she tends to be generally quite blunt and has difficulty understanding humor and others’ perspectives. An autism diagnosis is made with the recommendation of application to Developmental Disability Services, given impaired adaptive skills, as a means of utilizing community-based supports to facilitate eventually obtaining a high school equivalency credential, a job, healthier living habits, and comfortable social outlets.
Discussion
It is crucial for providers to be aware of nuanced presentations of autism spectrum disorders that may have been missed in early childhood when social demands are less complicated, particularly in persons identified as female at birth, nonbinary individuals, and those belonging to minority groups. It is also important to address the widely acknowledged trend of adolescents turning to social media influencers for information around neurodevelopmental conditions, at a time in their lives when social anxiety and self-awareness are generally heightened. For an adolescent, a young social media influencer may feel like a more salient and reliable source of information than an adult with various letters after their name. A respectful relationship between a teen and a thoughtful primary care provider can help gain trust to foster open conversations around their concerns, which can further help determine if a referral to a psychologist or developmental pediatrician for a formal autism assessment is truly warranted, highlighting the need for increased diagnostic capacity for such. While it is certainly important for providers to keep an open mind and to have continued awareness around the concept of late autism diagnoses, it is wise to also be aware of this recent trend among adolescents as providers seek to guide youth toward appropriate therapies and services.
Dr. Roth is a developmental and behavioral pediatrician in Eugene, Ore. She has no conflicts of interest.
A 16-year-old female presents for a self-identified concern around the possibility that she is experiencing an autism spectrum disorder. She relays to the developmental pediatrician that she has been learning a lot about autism on TikTok and through other social media sites, and has become strongly convinced that she meets medical criteria for this disorder.
A careful developmental history via a detailed interview with the mother reveals normal acquisition of early developmental milestones in addition to long-standing well-modulated eye contact felt to be paired fluidly with directed affect and gestures. The teen is described as having been an engaging toddler and preschooler, without restricted interests or repetitive behaviors, and having had no major challenges in grade school with behaviors, friendships, or academics.
During the pandemic, however, the teen became quite isolated. She developed anxiety with depression, and then started having some new repetitive arm movements within the last 12-18 months. In clinic, the teen makes robustly effortful arm-waving movements, which are noted to wane when she becomes more animated and excited during conversation, and to increase when she is less distracted by conversation and more focused on the movements.
She directs affect nicely toward her mother, while avoiding looking in the direction of the examiner until later in the evaluation when she becomes more relaxed. Prosody of speech and intonation are typical, and she describes having a close group of friends with whom she spends quite a bit of time.
The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS-2 module 3) is used to gather structured observations, and these social presses yield flowing social engagement with the examiner, good understanding of humor, and overall excellent verbal and nonverbal communication skills. The teen describes hypervigilance around the emotions of others, a natural ease in understanding the perspectives of others, and a quick ability to read the energy of a room. She does have some interest in some more obscure online game forums, but her friends do as well, and she otherwise does not have a history of intrusive fixations. A social history reveals past significant verbal abuse in the home by means of her father during her first 11 years of life, which is described as quite traumatic.
After careful and thoughtful consideration (recognizing the known statistics around girls assigned female at birth, as well as nonbinary individuals and minoritized groups being underdiagnosed with autism), the history and observations are not felt to be consistent with autism, but with anxiety within the context of a trauma and stressor-related disorder. Even when accounting for the possibility of “masking,” the teen still does not meet criteria for autism based on history and presentation. The habit movements are not typical of usual stereotypies or of tics (which tend to increase with excitement and tend to have a more effortless quality), and are felt to possibly be functional in origin. Upon gently sharing these conclusions with the teen, she bursts into tears, stating her friends may now accuse her of lying, as she has already been claiming to have autism online and in person at school.
Countering social media diagnoses
This type of scenario is becoming increasingly common, with teens turning online primarily to social media accounts to gain knowledge around various neurologic and mental health conditions. Greater normalization of neurodiversity and greater access to high-quality information about neurodevelopmental differences is certainly progress, though unfortunately some online depictions of these conditions are simply not accurate. Many adolescents are keenly searching for both their personal identity and also a community through which they might feel wholly accepted, after experiencing some level of isolation during the pandemic followed by increased social discomfort in attempting to reintegrate into school life and society.
Connecting the teen with a good-fit therapist and working to replace excessive screen time with exercise, outdoor activities, and in-person engagement with friends and family are also crucial interventions, though they can be incredibly difficult for families to achieve given various patient-specific and societal barriers. The overlap in symptomatology among anxiety, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorders is expansive, making it understandable that young people might misjudge their personal experience of life for a neurodevelopmental disorder for which they do not truly meet criteria. Increasing access to therapists well versed in trauma-informed care is a frequently referenced need, highlighted in this case.Another case
In contrast to the case scenario above is that of a 19-year-old female presenting for a formal autism evaluation at the urging of her father, who has had concerns around her severe “shyness” throughout her life. He is concerned that she was not able to obtain a high school diploma despite appearing to have adequate cognitive skills, is currently quite isolated, and does not appear equipped to hold a job at this time. He describes her as having been a very quiet and self-directed young child who greatly benefited from the communication and social scaffolding provided by her slightly older and neurotypical sister. She has generally not had true friends, though she had no behavioral or academic difficulties in school other than seeming aloof and unusually quiet. Atypical social approaches have become more apparent over time, as relationship navigation has become more complex with age. She is noted to have frequent stereotyped hand-to-face movements throughout the evaluation, as well as a flat affect and unusual voice quality. She speaks slowly and softly, and while she does make eye contact, it is less well modulated than would be expected. She is very focused on her cat and online interests during conversation, and tends to give stilted answers to open-ended questions. During the interview portion of the ADOS, she demonstrates little insight into friendships and reports feeling very content on her own, though is open to the idea of relationships in the future and would like to learn how to achieve connections with others. Her father reports she tends to be generally quite blunt and has difficulty understanding humor and others’ perspectives. An autism diagnosis is made with the recommendation of application to Developmental Disability Services, given impaired adaptive skills, as a means of utilizing community-based supports to facilitate eventually obtaining a high school equivalency credential, a job, healthier living habits, and comfortable social outlets.
Discussion
It is crucial for providers to be aware of nuanced presentations of autism spectrum disorders that may have been missed in early childhood when social demands are less complicated, particularly in persons identified as female at birth, nonbinary individuals, and those belonging to minority groups. It is also important to address the widely acknowledged trend of adolescents turning to social media influencers for information around neurodevelopmental conditions, at a time in their lives when social anxiety and self-awareness are generally heightened. For an adolescent, a young social media influencer may feel like a more salient and reliable source of information than an adult with various letters after their name. A respectful relationship between a teen and a thoughtful primary care provider can help gain trust to foster open conversations around their concerns, which can further help determine if a referral to a psychologist or developmental pediatrician for a formal autism assessment is truly warranted, highlighting the need for increased diagnostic capacity for such. While it is certainly important for providers to keep an open mind and to have continued awareness around the concept of late autism diagnoses, it is wise to also be aware of this recent trend among adolescents as providers seek to guide youth toward appropriate therapies and services.
Dr. Roth is a developmental and behavioral pediatrician in Eugene, Ore. She has no conflicts of interest.
RVUs: A fair measure of your productivity?
This transcript has been edited for clarity.
The other day, I received a flowery, elaborate email from none other than a physician recruiter: “Beautiful parks, hiking, great schools, blah blah blah, worked RVU production bonus on top of base pay.”
That last part – RVUs. I’m lost. I hear mixed reviews from physicians who work in RVU-based systems. The entire thing seems overly complex and confusing, so let’s clear it up. I did my research, and I’m going to explain RVUs.
Types of RVUs
RVUs, or relative value units, are a standard set by Medicare, used to measure physician productivity and ultimately determine compensation. There are three types:
- Work RVUs (basically everything that happens during a patient encounter).
- Practice expense RVUs.
- Professional liability insurance RVUs.
Now, envision this equation. All three of those RVUs are each multiplied by a geographic practice cost index to come up with a total number, and then that is multiplied by the Medicare conversion factor, which right now is around $33 to $34, to come up with a total dollar amount.
Work RVUs make up the bulk of total RVUs and they get their value from CPT codes. That value is determined by CMS. The AMA’s Relative Value Scale Update Committee, or RUC, which is made up of 32 people from various medical and surgical subspecialties, regularly meets and makes recommendations on the value of various CPT codes.
Is specialty representation fair and balanced?
CMS historically has accepted a high percentage of RUC’s recommendations, so this is a very influential committee. This is also why RUC has led to some controversy, with some stating that there is a lack of primary care representation, and perhaps this is why CPT codes related to procedures tend to reimburse higher.
How does one weigh the value of an hour-long palliative conversation against the quick removal of a benign skin lesion? That’s a loaded question.
This is especially important if your salary, or at least part of it, is determined by total RVUs. You want to have a sense of the pros and cons of working in an RVU system and how this relates to your specialty, your practice, and your schedule.
An RVU-based system provides an objective measure on complex patient encounters, volume, and procedures, and it’s a somewhat unified measure. The cons are pretty clear because these models favor you seeing many patients and billing a lot, and often this favors employers over physicians.
Dr. Patel is a clinical instructor, department of pediatrics, at Columbia University, New York, and a pediatric hospitalist at Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital of New York–Presbyterian. He reported a conflict of interest with Medumo.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
This transcript has been edited for clarity.
The other day, I received a flowery, elaborate email from none other than a physician recruiter: “Beautiful parks, hiking, great schools, blah blah blah, worked RVU production bonus on top of base pay.”
That last part – RVUs. I’m lost. I hear mixed reviews from physicians who work in RVU-based systems. The entire thing seems overly complex and confusing, so let’s clear it up. I did my research, and I’m going to explain RVUs.
Types of RVUs
RVUs, or relative value units, are a standard set by Medicare, used to measure physician productivity and ultimately determine compensation. There are three types:
- Work RVUs (basically everything that happens during a patient encounter).
- Practice expense RVUs.
- Professional liability insurance RVUs.
Now, envision this equation. All three of those RVUs are each multiplied by a geographic practice cost index to come up with a total number, and then that is multiplied by the Medicare conversion factor, which right now is around $33 to $34, to come up with a total dollar amount.
Work RVUs make up the bulk of total RVUs and they get their value from CPT codes. That value is determined by CMS. The AMA’s Relative Value Scale Update Committee, or RUC, which is made up of 32 people from various medical and surgical subspecialties, regularly meets and makes recommendations on the value of various CPT codes.
Is specialty representation fair and balanced?
CMS historically has accepted a high percentage of RUC’s recommendations, so this is a very influential committee. This is also why RUC has led to some controversy, with some stating that there is a lack of primary care representation, and perhaps this is why CPT codes related to procedures tend to reimburse higher.
How does one weigh the value of an hour-long palliative conversation against the quick removal of a benign skin lesion? That’s a loaded question.
This is especially important if your salary, or at least part of it, is determined by total RVUs. You want to have a sense of the pros and cons of working in an RVU system and how this relates to your specialty, your practice, and your schedule.
An RVU-based system provides an objective measure on complex patient encounters, volume, and procedures, and it’s a somewhat unified measure. The cons are pretty clear because these models favor you seeing many patients and billing a lot, and often this favors employers over physicians.
Dr. Patel is a clinical instructor, department of pediatrics, at Columbia University, New York, and a pediatric hospitalist at Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital of New York–Presbyterian. He reported a conflict of interest with Medumo.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
This transcript has been edited for clarity.
The other day, I received a flowery, elaborate email from none other than a physician recruiter: “Beautiful parks, hiking, great schools, blah blah blah, worked RVU production bonus on top of base pay.”
That last part – RVUs. I’m lost. I hear mixed reviews from physicians who work in RVU-based systems. The entire thing seems overly complex and confusing, so let’s clear it up. I did my research, and I’m going to explain RVUs.
Types of RVUs
RVUs, or relative value units, are a standard set by Medicare, used to measure physician productivity and ultimately determine compensation. There are three types:
- Work RVUs (basically everything that happens during a patient encounter).
- Practice expense RVUs.
- Professional liability insurance RVUs.
Now, envision this equation. All three of those RVUs are each multiplied by a geographic practice cost index to come up with a total number, and then that is multiplied by the Medicare conversion factor, which right now is around $33 to $34, to come up with a total dollar amount.
Work RVUs make up the bulk of total RVUs and they get their value from CPT codes. That value is determined by CMS. The AMA’s Relative Value Scale Update Committee, or RUC, which is made up of 32 people from various medical and surgical subspecialties, regularly meets and makes recommendations on the value of various CPT codes.
Is specialty representation fair and balanced?
CMS historically has accepted a high percentage of RUC’s recommendations, so this is a very influential committee. This is also why RUC has led to some controversy, with some stating that there is a lack of primary care representation, and perhaps this is why CPT codes related to procedures tend to reimburse higher.
How does one weigh the value of an hour-long palliative conversation against the quick removal of a benign skin lesion? That’s a loaded question.
This is especially important if your salary, or at least part of it, is determined by total RVUs. You want to have a sense of the pros and cons of working in an RVU system and how this relates to your specialty, your practice, and your schedule.
An RVU-based system provides an objective measure on complex patient encounters, volume, and procedures, and it’s a somewhat unified measure. The cons are pretty clear because these models favor you seeing many patients and billing a lot, and often this favors employers over physicians.
Dr. Patel is a clinical instructor, department of pediatrics, at Columbia University, New York, and a pediatric hospitalist at Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital of New York–Presbyterian. He reported a conflict of interest with Medumo.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patch testing finds higher prevalence of ACD among children with AD
, a finding that investigators say underscores the value of considering ACD in patients with AD and referring more children for testing.
ACD is underdetected in children with AD. In some cases, it may be misconstrued to be AD, and patch testing, the gold standard for diagnosing ACD, is often not performed, said senior author JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, a pediatric dermatologist and director of contact and occupational dermatology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and his co-authors, in the study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
Dr. Yu and his colleagues utilized a database in which dermatologists and some allergists, all of whom had substantive experience in patch testing and in diagnosing and managing ACD in children, entered information about children who were referred to them for testing.
Of 912 children referred for patch testing between 2018 and 2022 from 14 geographically diverse centers in the United States (615 with AD and 297 without AD), those with AD were more likely to have more than one positive reaction (odds radio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.14; P = .005) and had a greater number of positive results overall (2.3 vs. 1.9; P = .012).
AD and ACD both present with red, itchy, eczema-like patches and plaques and can be “really hard to differentiate,” Dr. Yu said in an interview.
“Not everybody with AD needs patch testing,” he said, “but I do think some [patients] who have rashes in unusual locations or rashes that don’t seem to improve within an appropriate amount of time to topical medications ... are the children who probably should have patch testing.”
Candidates for patch testing include children with AD who present with isolated head or neck, hand or foot, or anal or genital dermatitis, Dr. Yu and his colleagues write in the study. In addition, Dr. Yu said in the interview, “if you have a child who has AD that involves the elbow and back of the knees but then they get new-onset facial dermatitis, say, or new-onset eyelid dermatitis ... there’s [significant] value in patch testing.”
Children with AD in the study had a more generalized distribution of dermatitis and were significantly less likely to have dermatitis affecting the anal or genital region, the authors note in the study.
Asked to comment on the results, Jennifer Perryman, MD, a dermatologist at UCHealth, Greeley, Colo., who performs patch testing in children and adults, said that ACD is indeed “often underdiagnosed” in children with AD, and the study “solidifies” the importance of considering ACD in this population.
“Clinicians should think about testing children when AD is [not well controlled or] is getting worse, is in an atypical distribution, or if they are considering systemic treatment,” she said in an e-mail.
“I tell my patients, ‘I know you have AD, but you could also have comorbid ACD, and if we can find and control that, we can make you better without adding more to your routine, medications, etc.’ ” said Dr. Perryman, who was not involved in the research.
Top allergens
The top 10 allergens between children with and without AD were largely similar, the authors of the study report. Nickel was the most common allergen identified in both groups, and cobalt was in the top five for both groups. Fragrances (including hydroperoxides of linalool), preservatives (including methylisothiazolinone [MI]), and neomycin ranked in the top 10 in both groups, though prevalence differed.
MI, a preservative frequently used in personal care products and in other products like school glue and paint, was the second most common allergen identified in children with AD. Allergy to MI has “recently become an epidemic in the United States, with rapidly increasing prevalence and importance as a source of ACD among both children and adults,” the authors note.
Children with AD were significantly more likely, however, to have ACD to bacitracin (OR, 3.23; P = .030) and to cocamidopropyl betaine (OR, 3.69; P = .0007), the latter of which is a popular surfactant used in “baby” and “gentle” skincare products. This is unsurprising, given that children with AD are “more often exposed to a myriad of topical treatments,” Dr. Yu and his colleagues write.
Although not a top 10 allergen for either group, ACD to “carba mix,” a combination of three chemicals used to make medical adhesives and other rubber products (such as pacifiers, toys, school supplies, and rubber gloves) was significantly more common in children with AD than in those without (OR, 3.36; P = .025).
Among other findings from the study: Children with AD were more likely to have a longer history of dermatitis (4.1 vs. 1.6 years, P < .0001) prior to patch testing. Testing occurred at a mean age of 11 and 12.3 years for children with and without AD, respectively.
The number of allergens tested and the patch testing series chosen per patient were “not statistically different” between the children with and without AD, the researchers report.
Patch testing availability
Clinicians may be hesitant to subject a child to patch testing, but the process is well tolerated in most children, Dr. Perryman said. She uses a modified panel for children that omits less relevant allergens and usually limits patch testing to age 2 years or older due to a young child’s smaller surface area.
Dr. Yu, who developed an interest in patch testing during his residency at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, where he worked with a patch-testing expert, will test children as young as 3-4 months with a “small selection of patches.”
The challenge with a call for more patch testing is a shortage of trained physicians. “In all of Boston, where we have hundreds of dermatologists, there are only about four of us who really do patch testing. My wait time is about 6 months,” said Dr. Yu, who is also an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Allergists at Massachusetts General Hospital do “some patch testing ... but they refer a lot of the most complicated cases to me,” he said, noting that patch testing and management of ACD involves detailed counseling for patients about avoidance of allergens. “Overall dermatologists represent the largest group of doctors who have proficiency in patch testing, and there just aren’t many of us.”
Dr. Perryman also said that patch testing is often performed by dermatologists who specialize in treating ACD and AD, though there seems to be “regional variance” in the level of involvement of dermatologists and allergists in patch testing.
Not all residency programs have hands-on patch testing opportunities, Dr. Yu said. A study published in Dermatitis, which he co-authored, showed that in 2020, 47.5% of dermatology residency programs had formal patch testing rotations. This represented improvement but is still not enough, he said.
The American Contact Dermatitis Society offers patch-testing mentorship programs, and the American Academy of Dermatology has recently begun offered a patch testing workshop at its annual meetings, said Dr. Yu, who received 4 weeks of training in the Society’s mentorship program and is now involved in the American Academy of Dermatology’s workshops and as a trainer/lecturer at the Contact Dermatitis Institute.
The study was supported by the Dermatology Foundation. Dr. Yu and his co-investigators reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Perryman had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, a finding that investigators say underscores the value of considering ACD in patients with AD and referring more children for testing.
ACD is underdetected in children with AD. In some cases, it may be misconstrued to be AD, and patch testing, the gold standard for diagnosing ACD, is often not performed, said senior author JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, a pediatric dermatologist and director of contact and occupational dermatology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and his co-authors, in the study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
Dr. Yu and his colleagues utilized a database in which dermatologists and some allergists, all of whom had substantive experience in patch testing and in diagnosing and managing ACD in children, entered information about children who were referred to them for testing.
Of 912 children referred for patch testing between 2018 and 2022 from 14 geographically diverse centers in the United States (615 with AD and 297 without AD), those with AD were more likely to have more than one positive reaction (odds radio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.14; P = .005) and had a greater number of positive results overall (2.3 vs. 1.9; P = .012).
AD and ACD both present with red, itchy, eczema-like patches and plaques and can be “really hard to differentiate,” Dr. Yu said in an interview.
“Not everybody with AD needs patch testing,” he said, “but I do think some [patients] who have rashes in unusual locations or rashes that don’t seem to improve within an appropriate amount of time to topical medications ... are the children who probably should have patch testing.”
Candidates for patch testing include children with AD who present with isolated head or neck, hand or foot, or anal or genital dermatitis, Dr. Yu and his colleagues write in the study. In addition, Dr. Yu said in the interview, “if you have a child who has AD that involves the elbow and back of the knees but then they get new-onset facial dermatitis, say, or new-onset eyelid dermatitis ... there’s [significant] value in patch testing.”
Children with AD in the study had a more generalized distribution of dermatitis and were significantly less likely to have dermatitis affecting the anal or genital region, the authors note in the study.
Asked to comment on the results, Jennifer Perryman, MD, a dermatologist at UCHealth, Greeley, Colo., who performs patch testing in children and adults, said that ACD is indeed “often underdiagnosed” in children with AD, and the study “solidifies” the importance of considering ACD in this population.
“Clinicians should think about testing children when AD is [not well controlled or] is getting worse, is in an atypical distribution, or if they are considering systemic treatment,” she said in an e-mail.
“I tell my patients, ‘I know you have AD, but you could also have comorbid ACD, and if we can find and control that, we can make you better without adding more to your routine, medications, etc.’ ” said Dr. Perryman, who was not involved in the research.
Top allergens
The top 10 allergens between children with and without AD were largely similar, the authors of the study report. Nickel was the most common allergen identified in both groups, and cobalt was in the top five for both groups. Fragrances (including hydroperoxides of linalool), preservatives (including methylisothiazolinone [MI]), and neomycin ranked in the top 10 in both groups, though prevalence differed.
MI, a preservative frequently used in personal care products and in other products like school glue and paint, was the second most common allergen identified in children with AD. Allergy to MI has “recently become an epidemic in the United States, with rapidly increasing prevalence and importance as a source of ACD among both children and adults,” the authors note.
Children with AD were significantly more likely, however, to have ACD to bacitracin (OR, 3.23; P = .030) and to cocamidopropyl betaine (OR, 3.69; P = .0007), the latter of which is a popular surfactant used in “baby” and “gentle” skincare products. This is unsurprising, given that children with AD are “more often exposed to a myriad of topical treatments,” Dr. Yu and his colleagues write.
Although not a top 10 allergen for either group, ACD to “carba mix,” a combination of three chemicals used to make medical adhesives and other rubber products (such as pacifiers, toys, school supplies, and rubber gloves) was significantly more common in children with AD than in those without (OR, 3.36; P = .025).
Among other findings from the study: Children with AD were more likely to have a longer history of dermatitis (4.1 vs. 1.6 years, P < .0001) prior to patch testing. Testing occurred at a mean age of 11 and 12.3 years for children with and without AD, respectively.
The number of allergens tested and the patch testing series chosen per patient were “not statistically different” between the children with and without AD, the researchers report.
Patch testing availability
Clinicians may be hesitant to subject a child to patch testing, but the process is well tolerated in most children, Dr. Perryman said. She uses a modified panel for children that omits less relevant allergens and usually limits patch testing to age 2 years or older due to a young child’s smaller surface area.
Dr. Yu, who developed an interest in patch testing during his residency at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, where he worked with a patch-testing expert, will test children as young as 3-4 months with a “small selection of patches.”
The challenge with a call for more patch testing is a shortage of trained physicians. “In all of Boston, where we have hundreds of dermatologists, there are only about four of us who really do patch testing. My wait time is about 6 months,” said Dr. Yu, who is also an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Allergists at Massachusetts General Hospital do “some patch testing ... but they refer a lot of the most complicated cases to me,” he said, noting that patch testing and management of ACD involves detailed counseling for patients about avoidance of allergens. “Overall dermatologists represent the largest group of doctors who have proficiency in patch testing, and there just aren’t many of us.”
Dr. Perryman also said that patch testing is often performed by dermatologists who specialize in treating ACD and AD, though there seems to be “regional variance” in the level of involvement of dermatologists and allergists in patch testing.
Not all residency programs have hands-on patch testing opportunities, Dr. Yu said. A study published in Dermatitis, which he co-authored, showed that in 2020, 47.5% of dermatology residency programs had formal patch testing rotations. This represented improvement but is still not enough, he said.
The American Contact Dermatitis Society offers patch-testing mentorship programs, and the American Academy of Dermatology has recently begun offered a patch testing workshop at its annual meetings, said Dr. Yu, who received 4 weeks of training in the Society’s mentorship program and is now involved in the American Academy of Dermatology’s workshops and as a trainer/lecturer at the Contact Dermatitis Institute.
The study was supported by the Dermatology Foundation. Dr. Yu and his co-investigators reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Perryman had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, a finding that investigators say underscores the value of considering ACD in patients with AD and referring more children for testing.
ACD is underdetected in children with AD. In some cases, it may be misconstrued to be AD, and patch testing, the gold standard for diagnosing ACD, is often not performed, said senior author JiaDe Yu, MD, MS, a pediatric dermatologist and director of contact and occupational dermatology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, and his co-authors, in the study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
Dr. Yu and his colleagues utilized a database in which dermatologists and some allergists, all of whom had substantive experience in patch testing and in diagnosing and managing ACD in children, entered information about children who were referred to them for testing.
Of 912 children referred for patch testing between 2018 and 2022 from 14 geographically diverse centers in the United States (615 with AD and 297 without AD), those with AD were more likely to have more than one positive reaction (odds radio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-2.14; P = .005) and had a greater number of positive results overall (2.3 vs. 1.9; P = .012).
AD and ACD both present with red, itchy, eczema-like patches and plaques and can be “really hard to differentiate,” Dr. Yu said in an interview.
“Not everybody with AD needs patch testing,” he said, “but I do think some [patients] who have rashes in unusual locations or rashes that don’t seem to improve within an appropriate amount of time to topical medications ... are the children who probably should have patch testing.”
Candidates for patch testing include children with AD who present with isolated head or neck, hand or foot, or anal or genital dermatitis, Dr. Yu and his colleagues write in the study. In addition, Dr. Yu said in the interview, “if you have a child who has AD that involves the elbow and back of the knees but then they get new-onset facial dermatitis, say, or new-onset eyelid dermatitis ... there’s [significant] value in patch testing.”
Children with AD in the study had a more generalized distribution of dermatitis and were significantly less likely to have dermatitis affecting the anal or genital region, the authors note in the study.
Asked to comment on the results, Jennifer Perryman, MD, a dermatologist at UCHealth, Greeley, Colo., who performs patch testing in children and adults, said that ACD is indeed “often underdiagnosed” in children with AD, and the study “solidifies” the importance of considering ACD in this population.
“Clinicians should think about testing children when AD is [not well controlled or] is getting worse, is in an atypical distribution, or if they are considering systemic treatment,” she said in an e-mail.
“I tell my patients, ‘I know you have AD, but you could also have comorbid ACD, and if we can find and control that, we can make you better without adding more to your routine, medications, etc.’ ” said Dr. Perryman, who was not involved in the research.
Top allergens
The top 10 allergens between children with and without AD were largely similar, the authors of the study report. Nickel was the most common allergen identified in both groups, and cobalt was in the top five for both groups. Fragrances (including hydroperoxides of linalool), preservatives (including methylisothiazolinone [MI]), and neomycin ranked in the top 10 in both groups, though prevalence differed.
MI, a preservative frequently used in personal care products and in other products like school glue and paint, was the second most common allergen identified in children with AD. Allergy to MI has “recently become an epidemic in the United States, with rapidly increasing prevalence and importance as a source of ACD among both children and adults,” the authors note.
Children with AD were significantly more likely, however, to have ACD to bacitracin (OR, 3.23; P = .030) and to cocamidopropyl betaine (OR, 3.69; P = .0007), the latter of which is a popular surfactant used in “baby” and “gentle” skincare products. This is unsurprising, given that children with AD are “more often exposed to a myriad of topical treatments,” Dr. Yu and his colleagues write.
Although not a top 10 allergen for either group, ACD to “carba mix,” a combination of three chemicals used to make medical adhesives and other rubber products (such as pacifiers, toys, school supplies, and rubber gloves) was significantly more common in children with AD than in those without (OR, 3.36; P = .025).
Among other findings from the study: Children with AD were more likely to have a longer history of dermatitis (4.1 vs. 1.6 years, P < .0001) prior to patch testing. Testing occurred at a mean age of 11 and 12.3 years for children with and without AD, respectively.
The number of allergens tested and the patch testing series chosen per patient were “not statistically different” between the children with and without AD, the researchers report.
Patch testing availability
Clinicians may be hesitant to subject a child to patch testing, but the process is well tolerated in most children, Dr. Perryman said. She uses a modified panel for children that omits less relevant allergens and usually limits patch testing to age 2 years or older due to a young child’s smaller surface area.
Dr. Yu, who developed an interest in patch testing during his residency at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, where he worked with a patch-testing expert, will test children as young as 3-4 months with a “small selection of patches.”
The challenge with a call for more patch testing is a shortage of trained physicians. “In all of Boston, where we have hundreds of dermatologists, there are only about four of us who really do patch testing. My wait time is about 6 months,” said Dr. Yu, who is also an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Allergists at Massachusetts General Hospital do “some patch testing ... but they refer a lot of the most complicated cases to me,” he said, noting that patch testing and management of ACD involves detailed counseling for patients about avoidance of allergens. “Overall dermatologists represent the largest group of doctors who have proficiency in patch testing, and there just aren’t many of us.”
Dr. Perryman also said that patch testing is often performed by dermatologists who specialize in treating ACD and AD, though there seems to be “regional variance” in the level of involvement of dermatologists and allergists in patch testing.
Not all residency programs have hands-on patch testing opportunities, Dr. Yu said. A study published in Dermatitis, which he co-authored, showed that in 2020, 47.5% of dermatology residency programs had formal patch testing rotations. This represented improvement but is still not enough, he said.
The American Contact Dermatitis Society offers patch-testing mentorship programs, and the American Academy of Dermatology has recently begun offered a patch testing workshop at its annual meetings, said Dr. Yu, who received 4 weeks of training in the Society’s mentorship program and is now involved in the American Academy of Dermatology’s workshops and as a trainer/lecturer at the Contact Dermatitis Institute.
The study was supported by the Dermatology Foundation. Dr. Yu and his co-investigators reported no conflicts of interest. Dr. Perryman had no disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY