Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin

Volunteer Opportunities Within Dermatology: More than Skin Deep

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/01/2021 - 13:58

The adage “so much to do, so little time” aptly describes the daily challenges facing dermatologists and dermatology residents. The time and attention required by direct patient care, writing notes, navigating electronic health records, and engaging in education and research as well as family commitments can drain even the most tireless clinician. In addition, dermatologists are expected to play a critical role in clinic and practice management to successfully curate an online presence and adapt their skills to successfully manage a teledermatology practice. Coupled with the time spent socializing with friends or colleagues and time for personal hobbies or exercise, it’s easy to see how sleep deprivation is common in many of our colleagues.

What’s being left out of these jam-packed schedules? Increasingly, it is the time and expertise dedicated to volunteering in our local communities. Two recent research letters highlighted how a dramatic increase in the number of research projects and publications is not mirrored by a similar increase in volunteer experiences as dermatology residency selection becomes more competitive.1,2

Although the rate of volunteerism among practicing dermatologists has yet to be studied, a brief review suggests a component of unmet dermatology need within our communities. It’s estimated that approximately 5% to 10% of all emergency department visits are for dermatologic concerns.3-5 In many cases, the reason for the visit is nonurgent and instead reflects a lack of other options for care. However, the need for dermatologists extends beyond the emergency department setting. A review of the prevalence of patients presenting for care to a group of regional free clinics found that 8% (N=5553) of all visitors sought care for dermatologic concerns.6 The benefit is not just for those seated on the examination table; research has shown that while many of the underlying factors resulting in physician burnout stem from systemic issues, participating in volunteer opportunities helps combat burnout in ourselves and our colleagues.7-9 Herein, opportunities that exist for dermatologists to reconnect with their communities, advocate for causes distinctive to the specialty, and care for neighbors most in need are highlighted.

Camp Wonder

Every year, children from across the United States living with chronic and debilitating skin conditions get the opportunity to join fellow campers and spend a week just being kids without the constant focus on being a patient. Camp Wonder’s founder and director, Francesca Tenconi, describes the camp as a place where kids “can form a community and can feel free to be themselves, without judgment, without stares. They get the chance to forget about their skin disease and be themselves” (oral communication, June 18, 2021). Tenconi and the camp’s cofounders and medical directors, Drs. Jenny Kim and Stefani Takahashi, envisioned the camp as a place for all campers regardless of their skin condition to feel safe and welcome. This overall mission guides camp leadership and staff every year over the course of the camp week where campers participate in a mix of traditional and nontraditional summer activities that are safe and accessible for all, from spending time in the pool to arts and crafts and a ropes course.

Camp Wonder is in its 21st year of hosting children and adolescents from across North America at its camp in Livermore, California. This year, Tenconi expects about 100 campers during the last week in July. Camp Wonder relies on medical staff volunteers to make the camp setting safe, inclusive, and fun. “Our dermatology residents and dermatology volunteers are a huge part of why we’re able to have camp,” said Tenconi. “A lot of our kids require very specific medical care throughout the week. We are able to provide this camp experience for them because we have this medical support system available, this specialized dermatology knowledge.” She also noted the benefit to the volunteers themselves, saying,“The feedback we get a lot from residents and dermatologists is that camp gave them a chance to understand the true-life impact of some of the skin diseases these kids and families are living with. Kids will open up to them and tell them how their disease has impacted them personally” (oral communication, June 18, 2021).



Volunteer medical providers help manage the medical needs of the campers beginning at check-in and work shifts in the infirmary as well as help with dispensing and administering medications, changing dressings, and applying ointments or other topical medications. When not assisting with medical care, medical staff can get to know the campers; help out with arts and crafts, games, sports, and other camp activities; and put on skits and plays for campers at nightly camp hangouts (Figure 1).

Figure 1. A and B, Camp Wonder volunteer medical staff in costume rehearsing for a nightly skit and breaking their own rules about soap overuse. Photographs courtesy of John Peters, MD (Portsmouth, Virginia).


How to Get Involved
Visit the website (https://www.csdf.org/camp-wonder) for information on becoming a medical volunteer for 2022. Donations to help keep the camp running also are greatly appreciated, as attendance, including travel costs, is free for families through the Children’s Skin Disease Foundation. Finally, dermatologists can help by keeping their young patients with skin disease in mind as future campers. The camp welcomes kids from across the United States and Canada and invites questions from dermatologists and families on how to become a camper and what the experience is like.

 

 

Native American Health Services Rotation

Located in the southwestern United States, the Navajo Nation is North America’s largest Native American tribe by enrollment and resides on the largest reservation in the United States.10 Comprised of 27,000 square miles within portions of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah, the reservation’s total area is greater than that of Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire combined.11 The reservation is home to an estimated 180,000 Navajo people, a population roughly the size of Salt Lake City, Utah. Yet, many homes on the reservation are without electricity, running water, telephones, or broadband access, and many roads on the reservation remain unpaved. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 4 dermatology residents were selected each year to travel to this unique and remote location to work with the staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Health Care Facility (Chinle, Arizona), an Indian Health Service facility, as part of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD)–sponsored Native American Health Services Resident Rotation (NAHSRR).

Dr. Lucinda Kohn, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the University of Colorado and the director of the NAHSRR program discovered the value of this rotation firsthand as a dermatology resident. In 2017, she traveled to the area to spend 2 weeks serving within the community. “I went because of a personal connection. My husband is Native American, although not Navajo. I wanted to experience what it was like to provide dermatologic care for Native Americans. I found the Navajo people to be so friendly and so grateful for our care. The clinicians we worked with at Chinle were excited to have us share our expertise and to pass on their knowledge to us,” said Dr. Kohn (personal communication, June 24, 2021).

Rotating residents provide dermatologic care for the Navajo people and share their unique medical skill set to local primary care clinicians serving as preceptors. They also may have an opportunity to learn from Native healers about traditional Navajo beliefs and ceremonies used as part of a holistic approach to healing.



The program, similar to volunteer programs across the country, was put on hold during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The Navajo nation witnessed a really tragic surge of COVID cases that required that limited medical resources be diverted to help cope with the pandemic,” says Dr. Kohn. “It really wasn’t safe for residents to travel to the reservation either, so the rotation had to be put on hold.” However, in April 2021, the health care staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Care Facility reached out to revive the program, which is now pending the green light from the AAD. It is unclear if or when AAD leadership will allow this rotation to restart. Dr. Kohn hopes to be able to start accepting new applications soon. “This rotation provides a wealth of benefits to all those involved, from the residents who get the chance to work with a unique population in need to the clinicians who gain a diverse understanding of dermatology treatment techniques. And of course, for the patients, who are so appreciative of the care they receive from our volunteers” (personal communication, June 25, 2021).

How to Get Involved
Dr. Kohn is happy to field questions regarding the rotation and requests for more information via email ([email protected]). Residents interested in this program also may reach out to the AAD’s Education and Volunteers Abroad Committee to express interest in the NAHSRR program’s reinstatement.

Destination Healthy Skin

Since 2017, the Skin Cancer Foundation’s Destination Healthy Skin (DHS) RV has been the setting for more than 3800 free skin cancer screenings provided by volunteers within underserved populations across the United States (Figure 2). After a year hiatus due to the pandemic, DHS hit the road again, starting in New York City on August 1 to 3, 2021. From there, the DHS RV will traverse the country in one large loop, starting with visits to large and small cities in the Midwest and the West Coast. Following a visit to San Diego, California, in early October, the RV will turn east, with stops in Arizona, Texas, and several southern states before ending in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Dr. Elizabeth Hale, Senior Vice President of the Skin Cancer Foundation, feels that increasing awareness of the importance of regular skin cancer screening for those at risk is more important than ever. “We know that many people in the past year put routine cancer screening on the back burner, but we’re beginning to appreciate that this has led to significant delays in skin cancer diagnosis and potentially more significant disease when cases are diagnosed.” Dr. Hale noted that as the country continues to return to a degree of normalcy, the backlog of patients now seeking their routine screening has led to longer wait times. She expects DHS may offer some relief. “There are no appointments necessary. If the RV is close to their hometown, patients have an advantage in being able to be seen first come, first served, without having to wait for an appointment or make sure their insurance is accepted. It’s a free screening that can increase access to dermatologists” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Figure 2. Drs. Elizabeth Hale (left) and Julie Karen (right) working a volunteer shift aboard the Destination Healthy Skin RV in New York City in August 2019. Photograph courtesy of Elizabeth Hale, MD (New York, New York).

The program’s organizers acknowledge that DHS is not a long-term solution for improving dermatology access in the United States and recognize that more needs to be done to raise awareness, both of the value that screenings can provide and the importance of sun-protective behavior. “This is an important first step,” says Dr. Hale. “It’s important that we disseminate that no one is immune to skin cancer. It’s about education, and this is a tool to educate patients that everyone should have a skin check once a year, regardless of where you live or what your skin type is” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Volunteer dermatologists are needed to assist with screenings when the DHS RV arrives in their community. Providers complete a screening form identifying any concerning lesions and can document specific lesions using the patient’s cell phone. Following the screenings, participating dermatologists are welcome to invite participants to make appointments at their practices or suggest local clinics for follow-up care.

How to Get Involved
The schedule for this year’s screening events can be found online (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/). Consider volunteering (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/physician-volunteers/) or helping to raise awareness by reaching out to local dermatology societies or free clinics in your area. Residents and physician’s assistants are welcome to volunteer as well, as long as they are under the on-site supervision of a board-certified dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

As medical professionals, we all recognize there are valuable contributions we can make to groups and organizations that need our help. The stresses and pressure of work and everyday life can make finding the time to offer that help seem impossible. Although it may seem counterintuitive, volunteering our time to help others can help us better navigate the professional burnout that many medical professionals experience today.

References
  1. Ezekor M, Pona A, Cline A, et al. An increasing trend in the number of publications and research projects among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:214-216.
  2. Atluri S, Seivright JR, Shi VY, et al. Volunteer and work experiences among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:E97-E98.
  3. Abokwidir M, Davis SA, Fleischer AB, et al. Use of the emergency department for dermatologic care in the United States by ethnic group. J Dermatolog Treat. 2015;26:392-394.
  4. Uscher-Pines L, Pines J, Kellermann A, et al. Emergency department visits for nonurgent conditions: systematic literature review. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19:47-59.
  5. Jack AR, Spence AA, Nichols BJ, et al. Cutaneous conditions leading to dermatology consultations in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2011;12:551-555.
  6. Ayoubi N, Mirza A-S, Swanson J, et al. Dermatologic care of uninsured patients managed at free clinics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:433-437.
  7. Wright AA, Katz IT. Beyond burnout—redesigning care to restore meaning and sanity for physicians. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:309-311.
  8. Bull C, Aucoin JB. Voluntary association participation and life satisfaction: a replication note. J Gerontol. 1975;30:73-76.
  9. Iserson KV. Burnout syndrome: global medicine volunteering as a possible treatment strategy. J Emerg Med. 2018;54:516-521.
  10. Romero S. Navajo Nation becomes largest tribe in U.S. after pandemic enrollment surge. New York Times. May 21, 2021. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/us/navajo-cherokee-population.html
  11. Moore GR, Benally J, Tuttle S. The Navajo Nation: quick facts. University of Arizona website. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1471.pdf
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 108(2)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E32-E35
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

The adage “so much to do, so little time” aptly describes the daily challenges facing dermatologists and dermatology residents. The time and attention required by direct patient care, writing notes, navigating electronic health records, and engaging in education and research as well as family commitments can drain even the most tireless clinician. In addition, dermatologists are expected to play a critical role in clinic and practice management to successfully curate an online presence and adapt their skills to successfully manage a teledermatology practice. Coupled with the time spent socializing with friends or colleagues and time for personal hobbies or exercise, it’s easy to see how sleep deprivation is common in many of our colleagues.

What’s being left out of these jam-packed schedules? Increasingly, it is the time and expertise dedicated to volunteering in our local communities. Two recent research letters highlighted how a dramatic increase in the number of research projects and publications is not mirrored by a similar increase in volunteer experiences as dermatology residency selection becomes more competitive.1,2

Although the rate of volunteerism among practicing dermatologists has yet to be studied, a brief review suggests a component of unmet dermatology need within our communities. It’s estimated that approximately 5% to 10% of all emergency department visits are for dermatologic concerns.3-5 In many cases, the reason for the visit is nonurgent and instead reflects a lack of other options for care. However, the need for dermatologists extends beyond the emergency department setting. A review of the prevalence of patients presenting for care to a group of regional free clinics found that 8% (N=5553) of all visitors sought care for dermatologic concerns.6 The benefit is not just for those seated on the examination table; research has shown that while many of the underlying factors resulting in physician burnout stem from systemic issues, participating in volunteer opportunities helps combat burnout in ourselves and our colleagues.7-9 Herein, opportunities that exist for dermatologists to reconnect with their communities, advocate for causes distinctive to the specialty, and care for neighbors most in need are highlighted.

Camp Wonder

Every year, children from across the United States living with chronic and debilitating skin conditions get the opportunity to join fellow campers and spend a week just being kids without the constant focus on being a patient. Camp Wonder’s founder and director, Francesca Tenconi, describes the camp as a place where kids “can form a community and can feel free to be themselves, without judgment, without stares. They get the chance to forget about their skin disease and be themselves” (oral communication, June 18, 2021). Tenconi and the camp’s cofounders and medical directors, Drs. Jenny Kim and Stefani Takahashi, envisioned the camp as a place for all campers regardless of their skin condition to feel safe and welcome. This overall mission guides camp leadership and staff every year over the course of the camp week where campers participate in a mix of traditional and nontraditional summer activities that are safe and accessible for all, from spending time in the pool to arts and crafts and a ropes course.

Camp Wonder is in its 21st year of hosting children and adolescents from across North America at its camp in Livermore, California. This year, Tenconi expects about 100 campers during the last week in July. Camp Wonder relies on medical staff volunteers to make the camp setting safe, inclusive, and fun. “Our dermatology residents and dermatology volunteers are a huge part of why we’re able to have camp,” said Tenconi. “A lot of our kids require very specific medical care throughout the week. We are able to provide this camp experience for them because we have this medical support system available, this specialized dermatology knowledge.” She also noted the benefit to the volunteers themselves, saying,“The feedback we get a lot from residents and dermatologists is that camp gave them a chance to understand the true-life impact of some of the skin diseases these kids and families are living with. Kids will open up to them and tell them how their disease has impacted them personally” (oral communication, June 18, 2021).



Volunteer medical providers help manage the medical needs of the campers beginning at check-in and work shifts in the infirmary as well as help with dispensing and administering medications, changing dressings, and applying ointments or other topical medications. When not assisting with medical care, medical staff can get to know the campers; help out with arts and crafts, games, sports, and other camp activities; and put on skits and plays for campers at nightly camp hangouts (Figure 1).

Figure 1. A and B, Camp Wonder volunteer medical staff in costume rehearsing for a nightly skit and breaking their own rules about soap overuse. Photographs courtesy of John Peters, MD (Portsmouth, Virginia).


How to Get Involved
Visit the website (https://www.csdf.org/camp-wonder) for information on becoming a medical volunteer for 2022. Donations to help keep the camp running also are greatly appreciated, as attendance, including travel costs, is free for families through the Children’s Skin Disease Foundation. Finally, dermatologists can help by keeping their young patients with skin disease in mind as future campers. The camp welcomes kids from across the United States and Canada and invites questions from dermatologists and families on how to become a camper and what the experience is like.

 

 

Native American Health Services Rotation

Located in the southwestern United States, the Navajo Nation is North America’s largest Native American tribe by enrollment and resides on the largest reservation in the United States.10 Comprised of 27,000 square miles within portions of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah, the reservation’s total area is greater than that of Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire combined.11 The reservation is home to an estimated 180,000 Navajo people, a population roughly the size of Salt Lake City, Utah. Yet, many homes on the reservation are without electricity, running water, telephones, or broadband access, and many roads on the reservation remain unpaved. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 4 dermatology residents were selected each year to travel to this unique and remote location to work with the staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Health Care Facility (Chinle, Arizona), an Indian Health Service facility, as part of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD)–sponsored Native American Health Services Resident Rotation (NAHSRR).

Dr. Lucinda Kohn, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the University of Colorado and the director of the NAHSRR program discovered the value of this rotation firsthand as a dermatology resident. In 2017, she traveled to the area to spend 2 weeks serving within the community. “I went because of a personal connection. My husband is Native American, although not Navajo. I wanted to experience what it was like to provide dermatologic care for Native Americans. I found the Navajo people to be so friendly and so grateful for our care. The clinicians we worked with at Chinle were excited to have us share our expertise and to pass on their knowledge to us,” said Dr. Kohn (personal communication, June 24, 2021).

Rotating residents provide dermatologic care for the Navajo people and share their unique medical skill set to local primary care clinicians serving as preceptors. They also may have an opportunity to learn from Native healers about traditional Navajo beliefs and ceremonies used as part of a holistic approach to healing.



The program, similar to volunteer programs across the country, was put on hold during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The Navajo nation witnessed a really tragic surge of COVID cases that required that limited medical resources be diverted to help cope with the pandemic,” says Dr. Kohn. “It really wasn’t safe for residents to travel to the reservation either, so the rotation had to be put on hold.” However, in April 2021, the health care staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Care Facility reached out to revive the program, which is now pending the green light from the AAD. It is unclear if or when AAD leadership will allow this rotation to restart. Dr. Kohn hopes to be able to start accepting new applications soon. “This rotation provides a wealth of benefits to all those involved, from the residents who get the chance to work with a unique population in need to the clinicians who gain a diverse understanding of dermatology treatment techniques. And of course, for the patients, who are so appreciative of the care they receive from our volunteers” (personal communication, June 25, 2021).

How to Get Involved
Dr. Kohn is happy to field questions regarding the rotation and requests for more information via email ([email protected]). Residents interested in this program also may reach out to the AAD’s Education and Volunteers Abroad Committee to express interest in the NAHSRR program’s reinstatement.

Destination Healthy Skin

Since 2017, the Skin Cancer Foundation’s Destination Healthy Skin (DHS) RV has been the setting for more than 3800 free skin cancer screenings provided by volunteers within underserved populations across the United States (Figure 2). After a year hiatus due to the pandemic, DHS hit the road again, starting in New York City on August 1 to 3, 2021. From there, the DHS RV will traverse the country in one large loop, starting with visits to large and small cities in the Midwest and the West Coast. Following a visit to San Diego, California, in early October, the RV will turn east, with stops in Arizona, Texas, and several southern states before ending in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Dr. Elizabeth Hale, Senior Vice President of the Skin Cancer Foundation, feels that increasing awareness of the importance of regular skin cancer screening for those at risk is more important than ever. “We know that many people in the past year put routine cancer screening on the back burner, but we’re beginning to appreciate that this has led to significant delays in skin cancer diagnosis and potentially more significant disease when cases are diagnosed.” Dr. Hale noted that as the country continues to return to a degree of normalcy, the backlog of patients now seeking their routine screening has led to longer wait times. She expects DHS may offer some relief. “There are no appointments necessary. If the RV is close to their hometown, patients have an advantage in being able to be seen first come, first served, without having to wait for an appointment or make sure their insurance is accepted. It’s a free screening that can increase access to dermatologists” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Figure 2. Drs. Elizabeth Hale (left) and Julie Karen (right) working a volunteer shift aboard the Destination Healthy Skin RV in New York City in August 2019. Photograph courtesy of Elizabeth Hale, MD (New York, New York).

The program’s organizers acknowledge that DHS is not a long-term solution for improving dermatology access in the United States and recognize that more needs to be done to raise awareness, both of the value that screenings can provide and the importance of sun-protective behavior. “This is an important first step,” says Dr. Hale. “It’s important that we disseminate that no one is immune to skin cancer. It’s about education, and this is a tool to educate patients that everyone should have a skin check once a year, regardless of where you live or what your skin type is” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Volunteer dermatologists are needed to assist with screenings when the DHS RV arrives in their community. Providers complete a screening form identifying any concerning lesions and can document specific lesions using the patient’s cell phone. Following the screenings, participating dermatologists are welcome to invite participants to make appointments at their practices or suggest local clinics for follow-up care.

How to Get Involved
The schedule for this year’s screening events can be found online (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/). Consider volunteering (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/physician-volunteers/) or helping to raise awareness by reaching out to local dermatology societies or free clinics in your area. Residents and physician’s assistants are welcome to volunteer as well, as long as they are under the on-site supervision of a board-certified dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

As medical professionals, we all recognize there are valuable contributions we can make to groups and organizations that need our help. The stresses and pressure of work and everyday life can make finding the time to offer that help seem impossible. Although it may seem counterintuitive, volunteering our time to help others can help us better navigate the professional burnout that many medical professionals experience today.

The adage “so much to do, so little time” aptly describes the daily challenges facing dermatologists and dermatology residents. The time and attention required by direct patient care, writing notes, navigating electronic health records, and engaging in education and research as well as family commitments can drain even the most tireless clinician. In addition, dermatologists are expected to play a critical role in clinic and practice management to successfully curate an online presence and adapt their skills to successfully manage a teledermatology practice. Coupled with the time spent socializing with friends or colleagues and time for personal hobbies or exercise, it’s easy to see how sleep deprivation is common in many of our colleagues.

What’s being left out of these jam-packed schedules? Increasingly, it is the time and expertise dedicated to volunteering in our local communities. Two recent research letters highlighted how a dramatic increase in the number of research projects and publications is not mirrored by a similar increase in volunteer experiences as dermatology residency selection becomes more competitive.1,2

Although the rate of volunteerism among practicing dermatologists has yet to be studied, a brief review suggests a component of unmet dermatology need within our communities. It’s estimated that approximately 5% to 10% of all emergency department visits are for dermatologic concerns.3-5 In many cases, the reason for the visit is nonurgent and instead reflects a lack of other options for care. However, the need for dermatologists extends beyond the emergency department setting. A review of the prevalence of patients presenting for care to a group of regional free clinics found that 8% (N=5553) of all visitors sought care for dermatologic concerns.6 The benefit is not just for those seated on the examination table; research has shown that while many of the underlying factors resulting in physician burnout stem from systemic issues, participating in volunteer opportunities helps combat burnout in ourselves and our colleagues.7-9 Herein, opportunities that exist for dermatologists to reconnect with their communities, advocate for causes distinctive to the specialty, and care for neighbors most in need are highlighted.

Camp Wonder

Every year, children from across the United States living with chronic and debilitating skin conditions get the opportunity to join fellow campers and spend a week just being kids without the constant focus on being a patient. Camp Wonder’s founder and director, Francesca Tenconi, describes the camp as a place where kids “can form a community and can feel free to be themselves, without judgment, without stares. They get the chance to forget about their skin disease and be themselves” (oral communication, June 18, 2021). Tenconi and the camp’s cofounders and medical directors, Drs. Jenny Kim and Stefani Takahashi, envisioned the camp as a place for all campers regardless of their skin condition to feel safe and welcome. This overall mission guides camp leadership and staff every year over the course of the camp week where campers participate in a mix of traditional and nontraditional summer activities that are safe and accessible for all, from spending time in the pool to arts and crafts and a ropes course.

Camp Wonder is in its 21st year of hosting children and adolescents from across North America at its camp in Livermore, California. This year, Tenconi expects about 100 campers during the last week in July. Camp Wonder relies on medical staff volunteers to make the camp setting safe, inclusive, and fun. “Our dermatology residents and dermatology volunteers are a huge part of why we’re able to have camp,” said Tenconi. “A lot of our kids require very specific medical care throughout the week. We are able to provide this camp experience for them because we have this medical support system available, this specialized dermatology knowledge.” She also noted the benefit to the volunteers themselves, saying,“The feedback we get a lot from residents and dermatologists is that camp gave them a chance to understand the true-life impact of some of the skin diseases these kids and families are living with. Kids will open up to them and tell them how their disease has impacted them personally” (oral communication, June 18, 2021).



Volunteer medical providers help manage the medical needs of the campers beginning at check-in and work shifts in the infirmary as well as help with dispensing and administering medications, changing dressings, and applying ointments or other topical medications. When not assisting with medical care, medical staff can get to know the campers; help out with arts and crafts, games, sports, and other camp activities; and put on skits and plays for campers at nightly camp hangouts (Figure 1).

Figure 1. A and B, Camp Wonder volunteer medical staff in costume rehearsing for a nightly skit and breaking their own rules about soap overuse. Photographs courtesy of John Peters, MD (Portsmouth, Virginia).


How to Get Involved
Visit the website (https://www.csdf.org/camp-wonder) for information on becoming a medical volunteer for 2022. Donations to help keep the camp running also are greatly appreciated, as attendance, including travel costs, is free for families through the Children’s Skin Disease Foundation. Finally, dermatologists can help by keeping their young patients with skin disease in mind as future campers. The camp welcomes kids from across the United States and Canada and invites questions from dermatologists and families on how to become a camper and what the experience is like.

 

 

Native American Health Services Rotation

Located in the southwestern United States, the Navajo Nation is North America’s largest Native American tribe by enrollment and resides on the largest reservation in the United States.10 Comprised of 27,000 square miles within portions of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah, the reservation’s total area is greater than that of Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire combined.11 The reservation is home to an estimated 180,000 Navajo people, a population roughly the size of Salt Lake City, Utah. Yet, many homes on the reservation are without electricity, running water, telephones, or broadband access, and many roads on the reservation remain unpaved. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 4 dermatology residents were selected each year to travel to this unique and remote location to work with the staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Health Care Facility (Chinle, Arizona), an Indian Health Service facility, as part of the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD)–sponsored Native American Health Services Resident Rotation (NAHSRR).

Dr. Lucinda Kohn, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the University of Colorado and the director of the NAHSRR program discovered the value of this rotation firsthand as a dermatology resident. In 2017, she traveled to the area to spend 2 weeks serving within the community. “I went because of a personal connection. My husband is Native American, although not Navajo. I wanted to experience what it was like to provide dermatologic care for Native Americans. I found the Navajo people to be so friendly and so grateful for our care. The clinicians we worked with at Chinle were excited to have us share our expertise and to pass on their knowledge to us,” said Dr. Kohn (personal communication, June 24, 2021).

Rotating residents provide dermatologic care for the Navajo people and share their unique medical skill set to local primary care clinicians serving as preceptors. They also may have an opportunity to learn from Native healers about traditional Navajo beliefs and ceremonies used as part of a holistic approach to healing.



The program, similar to volunteer programs across the country, was put on hold during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The Navajo nation witnessed a really tragic surge of COVID cases that required that limited medical resources be diverted to help cope with the pandemic,” says Dr. Kohn. “It really wasn’t safe for residents to travel to the reservation either, so the rotation had to be put on hold.” However, in April 2021, the health care staff of the Chinle Comprehensive Care Facility reached out to revive the program, which is now pending the green light from the AAD. It is unclear if or when AAD leadership will allow this rotation to restart. Dr. Kohn hopes to be able to start accepting new applications soon. “This rotation provides a wealth of benefits to all those involved, from the residents who get the chance to work with a unique population in need to the clinicians who gain a diverse understanding of dermatology treatment techniques. And of course, for the patients, who are so appreciative of the care they receive from our volunteers” (personal communication, June 25, 2021).

How to Get Involved
Dr. Kohn is happy to field questions regarding the rotation and requests for more information via email ([email protected]). Residents interested in this program also may reach out to the AAD’s Education and Volunteers Abroad Committee to express interest in the NAHSRR program’s reinstatement.

Destination Healthy Skin

Since 2017, the Skin Cancer Foundation’s Destination Healthy Skin (DHS) RV has been the setting for more than 3800 free skin cancer screenings provided by volunteers within underserved populations across the United States (Figure 2). After a year hiatus due to the pandemic, DHS hit the road again, starting in New York City on August 1 to 3, 2021. From there, the DHS RV will traverse the country in one large loop, starting with visits to large and small cities in the Midwest and the West Coast. Following a visit to San Diego, California, in early October, the RV will turn east, with stops in Arizona, Texas, and several southern states before ending in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Dr. Elizabeth Hale, Senior Vice President of the Skin Cancer Foundation, feels that increasing awareness of the importance of regular skin cancer screening for those at risk is more important than ever. “We know that many people in the past year put routine cancer screening on the back burner, but we’re beginning to appreciate that this has led to significant delays in skin cancer diagnosis and potentially more significant disease when cases are diagnosed.” Dr. Hale noted that as the country continues to return to a degree of normalcy, the backlog of patients now seeking their routine screening has led to longer wait times. She expects DHS may offer some relief. “There are no appointments necessary. If the RV is close to their hometown, patients have an advantage in being able to be seen first come, first served, without having to wait for an appointment or make sure their insurance is accepted. It’s a free screening that can increase access to dermatologists” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Figure 2. Drs. Elizabeth Hale (left) and Julie Karen (right) working a volunteer shift aboard the Destination Healthy Skin RV in New York City in August 2019. Photograph courtesy of Elizabeth Hale, MD (New York, New York).

The program’s organizers acknowledge that DHS is not a long-term solution for improving dermatology access in the United States and recognize that more needs to be done to raise awareness, both of the value that screenings can provide and the importance of sun-protective behavior. “This is an important first step,” says Dr. Hale. “It’s important that we disseminate that no one is immune to skin cancer. It’s about education, and this is a tool to educate patients that everyone should have a skin check once a year, regardless of where you live or what your skin type is” (personal communication, June 21, 2021).

Volunteer dermatologists are needed to assist with screenings when the DHS RV arrives in their community. Providers complete a screening form identifying any concerning lesions and can document specific lesions using the patient’s cell phone. Following the screenings, participating dermatologists are welcome to invite participants to make appointments at their practices or suggest local clinics for follow-up care.

How to Get Involved
The schedule for this year’s screening events can be found online (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/). Consider volunteering (https://www.skincancer.org/early-detection/destination-healthy-skin/physician-volunteers/) or helping to raise awareness by reaching out to local dermatology societies or free clinics in your area. Residents and physician’s assistants are welcome to volunteer as well, as long as they are under the on-site supervision of a board-certified dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

As medical professionals, we all recognize there are valuable contributions we can make to groups and organizations that need our help. The stresses and pressure of work and everyday life can make finding the time to offer that help seem impossible. Although it may seem counterintuitive, volunteering our time to help others can help us better navigate the professional burnout that many medical professionals experience today.

References
  1. Ezekor M, Pona A, Cline A, et al. An increasing trend in the number of publications and research projects among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:214-216.
  2. Atluri S, Seivright JR, Shi VY, et al. Volunteer and work experiences among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:E97-E98.
  3. Abokwidir M, Davis SA, Fleischer AB, et al. Use of the emergency department for dermatologic care in the United States by ethnic group. J Dermatolog Treat. 2015;26:392-394.
  4. Uscher-Pines L, Pines J, Kellermann A, et al. Emergency department visits for nonurgent conditions: systematic literature review. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19:47-59.
  5. Jack AR, Spence AA, Nichols BJ, et al. Cutaneous conditions leading to dermatology consultations in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2011;12:551-555.
  6. Ayoubi N, Mirza A-S, Swanson J, et al. Dermatologic care of uninsured patients managed at free clinics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:433-437.
  7. Wright AA, Katz IT. Beyond burnout—redesigning care to restore meaning and sanity for physicians. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:309-311.
  8. Bull C, Aucoin JB. Voluntary association participation and life satisfaction: a replication note. J Gerontol. 1975;30:73-76.
  9. Iserson KV. Burnout syndrome: global medicine volunteering as a possible treatment strategy. J Emerg Med. 2018;54:516-521.
  10. Romero S. Navajo Nation becomes largest tribe in U.S. after pandemic enrollment surge. New York Times. May 21, 2021. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/us/navajo-cherokee-population.html
  11. Moore GR, Benally J, Tuttle S. The Navajo Nation: quick facts. University of Arizona website. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1471.pdf
References
  1. Ezekor M, Pona A, Cline A, et al. An increasing trend in the number of publications and research projects among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;83:214-216.
  2. Atluri S, Seivright JR, Shi VY, et al. Volunteer and work experiences among dermatology residency applicants. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:E97-E98.
  3. Abokwidir M, Davis SA, Fleischer AB, et al. Use of the emergency department for dermatologic care in the United States by ethnic group. J Dermatolog Treat. 2015;26:392-394.
  4. Uscher-Pines L, Pines J, Kellermann A, et al. Emergency department visits for nonurgent conditions: systematic literature review. Am J Manag Care. 2013;19:47-59.
  5. Jack AR, Spence AA, Nichols BJ, et al. Cutaneous conditions leading to dermatology consultations in the emergency department. West J Emerg Med. 2011;12:551-555.
  6. Ayoubi N, Mirza A-S, Swanson J, et al. Dermatologic care of uninsured patients managed at free clinics. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:433-437.
  7. Wright AA, Katz IT. Beyond burnout—redesigning care to restore meaning and sanity for physicians. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:309-311.
  8. Bull C, Aucoin JB. Voluntary association participation and life satisfaction: a replication note. J Gerontol. 1975;30:73-76.
  9. Iserson KV. Burnout syndrome: global medicine volunteering as a possible treatment strategy. J Emerg Med. 2018;54:516-521.
  10. Romero S. Navajo Nation becomes largest tribe in U.S. after pandemic enrollment surge. New York Times. May 21, 2021. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/us/navajo-cherokee-population.html
  11. Moore GR, Benally J, Tuttle S. The Navajo Nation: quick facts. University of Arizona website. Accessed August 19, 2021. https://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1471.pdf
Issue
cutis - 108(2)
Issue
cutis - 108(2)
Page Number
E32-E35
Page Number
E32-E35
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Volunteerism rates among dermatology residents seem to be decreasing. We should work to combat this trend by finding ways to give back to our communities and spur our colleagues to do the same.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Dermatoethics for Dermatology Residents

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 06/23/2021 - 11:32

As dermatology residents, we have a lot on our plates. With so many diagnoses to learn and treatments to understand, the sheer volume of knowledge we are expected to be familiar with sometimes can be overwhelming. The thought of adding yet another thing to the list of many things we already need to know—least of all a topic such as dermatoethics—may be unappealing. This article will discuss the importance of ethics training in dermatology residency as well as provide helpful resources for how this training can be achieved.

Professionalism as a Core Competency

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) considers professionalism as 1 of its 6 core competencies.1 These competencies provide a conceptual framework detailing the domains physicians should be proficient in before they can enter autonomous practice. When it comes to professionalism, residents are expected to demonstrate compassion, integrity, and respect for others; honesty with patients; respect for patient confidentiality and autonomy; appropriate relationships with patients; accountability to patients, society, and the profession; and a sensitivity and responsiveness to diverse patient population.1

The ACGME milestones are intended to assess resident development within the 6 competencies with more specific parameters for evaluation.2 Those pertaining to professionalism evaluate a resident’s ability to demonstrate professional behavior, an understanding of ethical principles, accountability, and conscientiousness, as well as self-awareness and the ability to seek help for personal or professional well-being. The crux of the kinds of activities that constitute acquisition of these professional skills are specialty specific. The ACGME ultimately believes that having a working knowledge of professionalism and ethical principles prepares residents for practicing medicine in the real world. Because of these requirements, residency programs are expected to provide resources for residents to explore ethical problems faced by dermatologists.

Beyond “Passing” Residency

The reality is that learning about medical ethics and practicing professional behavior is not just about ticking boxes to get ACGME accreditation or to “pass” residency. The data suggest that having a strong foundation in these principles is good for overall personal well-being, job satisfaction, and patient care. Studies have shown that unprofessional behavior in medical school is correlated to disciplinary action by state licensing boards against practicing physicians.3,4 In fact, a study found that in one cohort of physicians (N=68), 95% of disciplinary actions were for lapses in professionalism, which included activities such as sexual misconduct and inappropriate prescribing.4 Behaving appropriately protects your license to practice medicine.

Thinking through these problematic ethical scenarios also goes beyond coming up with the right answer. Exploring ethical conundrums is thought to develop analytical skills that can help one navigate future tricky situations that can be morally distressing and can lead to burnout. Introspection and self-awareness coupled with these skills ideally will help physicians think through sensitive and difficult situations with the courage to hold true to their convictions and ultimately uphold the professionalism of the specialty.5



Self-awareness has the additional bonus of empowering physicians to acknowledge personal and professional limitations with the goal of seeking help when it is needed before it is too late. It comes as no surprise that how we feel as physicians directly impacts how we treat our patients. One study found that depressed residents were more than 6 times more likely to make medication errors compared to nondepressed colleagues.6 Regularly taking stock of our professional and personal reserves can go a long way to improving overall well-being.

 

 

Resources for Dermatoethics Training

The best starting point for developing a robust dermatoethics curriculum is the material provided by the American Board of Dermatology, which is available online.7 An ad hoc subcommittee of the American Board of Dermatology composed of experts in dermatoethics and resident education reviewed relevant ethics literature and identified 6 core domains considered fundamental to dermatology resident education in ethics and professionalism.8 This team also provided a thorough list of relevant background readings for each topic. To cover pertinent material, the subcommittee recommended a 60-minute teaching session every other month with the intent of covering all the material over a 3-year period. If your program directors are not aware of this great resource and you feel your own ethics training may be lacking, bringing this up as a template might be helpful. A detailed description of an innovative dermatoethics curriculum organized at the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island) in 2001 also may serve as a guide for programs hoping to design their own approach.5

For those interested in self-study, there is an excellent text dedicated to dermatoethics, which is aptly entitled Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology.9 This book offers superb case-based discussions on a wide range of ethical quandaries that dermatologists may face, ranging from unsolicited dermatologic advice (eg, Is it wrong to tell the person next to you in the grocery store that they might have a melanoma?) to research and publication ethics. This text provides a toolkit for handling tough situations in the clinic and beyond. The Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology publishes an Ethics Journal Club for which contributors can submit real-life practical ethical dilemmas, and the journal solicits a resolution or response from a dermatoethicist.



Additionally, a pilot curriculum project out of the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, Utah), of which I am a team member, currently is designing and testing several dermatoethics PowerPoint modules with the intention of making this material widely available through medical education portals.

The Hidden Curriculum

A formal curriculum can only provide so much when it comes to ethics training. In truth, much of what we learn as ethically minded dermatologists comes from our day-to-day practice.10 Paying attention to the more informal curriculum that we are immersed in during routine as well as unusual encounters also is important for achieving milestones. Teaching moments for thinking through ethical dilemmas abound, and this approach easily can be incorporated into routine workflow.11 Next time you encounter an ethical situation that gives you pause (eg, Can I biopsy an intubated patient without getting appropriate consent?), talk it through with your supervisor. Gems of autonomous practice often can be mined from these off-the-cuff conversations.

Can Professionalism Be Taught?

Finally, it is worth mentioning that while the number of resources available to dermatology residents for honing their ethics skills is increasing, ways of measuring the impact of this additional training in vivo are not.12 There are no good tools available to determine how ethics training influences resident behaviors. Similarly, there is no good evidence for what constitutes the most effective method for teaching medical ethics to trainees. It is a growing field with lots of room for more robust research. For now, the overall goal of a dermatoethics curriculum is to provide a mix of curriculum opportunities, ranging from formal lectures and readings to more informal conversations, with the hope of providing residents a toolbox for dealing with ethical dilemmas and a working knowledge of professionalism.

Final Thoughts

There are several resources available for dermatology programs to provide quality dermatoethics training to their residents. These can be mixed and matched to create a tailored formal curriculum alongside the more informal ethics training that happens in the clinic and on the wards. Providing this education is about more than just fulfilling accreditation requirements. Understanding ethical principles and how they can be applied to navigate sensitive situations is ultimately good for both professional and personal well-being.

References
  1. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME common program requirements (residency). ACGME website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidency2020.pdf
  2. Edgar L, McLean S, Hogan SO, et al. The milestones guidebook. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed June 10, 2021. acgme.org/portals/0/MilestonesGuidebook.pdf
  3. Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA, et al. Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2673-2682.
  4. Papadakis MA, Hodgson CS, Teherani A, et al. Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board. Acad Med. 2004;79:244-249.
  5. Bercovitch L, Long TP. Dermatoethics: a curriculum in bioethics and professionalism for dermatology residents at Brown Medical School. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56:679-682.
  6. Fahrenkopf AM, Sectish TC, Barger LK, et al. Rates of medication errors among depressed and burnt out residents: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2008;336:488-491.
  7. Recommended topics for 3-year dermatoethics curricular cycle. American Board of Dermatology website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.abderm.org/residents-and-fellows/dermatoethics.aspx
  8. Stoff BK, Grant-Kels JM, Brodell RT, et al. Introducing a curriculum in ethics and professionalism for dermatology residencies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1032-1034.
  9. Bercovitch L, Perlis C, Stoff BK, et al, eds. Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing; 2021.
  10. Hafferty FW, Franks R. The hidden curriculum, ethics teaching, and the structure of medical education. Acad Med. 1994;69:861-871.
  11. Aldrich N, Mostow E. Incorporating teaching dermatoethics in a busy outpatient clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:423-424.
  12. de la Garza S, Phuoc V, Throneberry S, et al. Teaching medical ethics in graduate and undergraduate medical education: a systematic review of effectiveness. Acad Psychiatry. 2017;41:520-525.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E15-E17
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

As dermatology residents, we have a lot on our plates. With so many diagnoses to learn and treatments to understand, the sheer volume of knowledge we are expected to be familiar with sometimes can be overwhelming. The thought of adding yet another thing to the list of many things we already need to know—least of all a topic such as dermatoethics—may be unappealing. This article will discuss the importance of ethics training in dermatology residency as well as provide helpful resources for how this training can be achieved.

Professionalism as a Core Competency

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) considers professionalism as 1 of its 6 core competencies.1 These competencies provide a conceptual framework detailing the domains physicians should be proficient in before they can enter autonomous practice. When it comes to professionalism, residents are expected to demonstrate compassion, integrity, and respect for others; honesty with patients; respect for patient confidentiality and autonomy; appropriate relationships with patients; accountability to patients, society, and the profession; and a sensitivity and responsiveness to diverse patient population.1

The ACGME milestones are intended to assess resident development within the 6 competencies with more specific parameters for evaluation.2 Those pertaining to professionalism evaluate a resident’s ability to demonstrate professional behavior, an understanding of ethical principles, accountability, and conscientiousness, as well as self-awareness and the ability to seek help for personal or professional well-being. The crux of the kinds of activities that constitute acquisition of these professional skills are specialty specific. The ACGME ultimately believes that having a working knowledge of professionalism and ethical principles prepares residents for practicing medicine in the real world. Because of these requirements, residency programs are expected to provide resources for residents to explore ethical problems faced by dermatologists.

Beyond “Passing” Residency

The reality is that learning about medical ethics and practicing professional behavior is not just about ticking boxes to get ACGME accreditation or to “pass” residency. The data suggest that having a strong foundation in these principles is good for overall personal well-being, job satisfaction, and patient care. Studies have shown that unprofessional behavior in medical school is correlated to disciplinary action by state licensing boards against practicing physicians.3,4 In fact, a study found that in one cohort of physicians (N=68), 95% of disciplinary actions were for lapses in professionalism, which included activities such as sexual misconduct and inappropriate prescribing.4 Behaving appropriately protects your license to practice medicine.

Thinking through these problematic ethical scenarios also goes beyond coming up with the right answer. Exploring ethical conundrums is thought to develop analytical skills that can help one navigate future tricky situations that can be morally distressing and can lead to burnout. Introspection and self-awareness coupled with these skills ideally will help physicians think through sensitive and difficult situations with the courage to hold true to their convictions and ultimately uphold the professionalism of the specialty.5



Self-awareness has the additional bonus of empowering physicians to acknowledge personal and professional limitations with the goal of seeking help when it is needed before it is too late. It comes as no surprise that how we feel as physicians directly impacts how we treat our patients. One study found that depressed residents were more than 6 times more likely to make medication errors compared to nondepressed colleagues.6 Regularly taking stock of our professional and personal reserves can go a long way to improving overall well-being.

 

 

Resources for Dermatoethics Training

The best starting point for developing a robust dermatoethics curriculum is the material provided by the American Board of Dermatology, which is available online.7 An ad hoc subcommittee of the American Board of Dermatology composed of experts in dermatoethics and resident education reviewed relevant ethics literature and identified 6 core domains considered fundamental to dermatology resident education in ethics and professionalism.8 This team also provided a thorough list of relevant background readings for each topic. To cover pertinent material, the subcommittee recommended a 60-minute teaching session every other month with the intent of covering all the material over a 3-year period. If your program directors are not aware of this great resource and you feel your own ethics training may be lacking, bringing this up as a template might be helpful. A detailed description of an innovative dermatoethics curriculum organized at the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island) in 2001 also may serve as a guide for programs hoping to design their own approach.5

For those interested in self-study, there is an excellent text dedicated to dermatoethics, which is aptly entitled Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology.9 This book offers superb case-based discussions on a wide range of ethical quandaries that dermatologists may face, ranging from unsolicited dermatologic advice (eg, Is it wrong to tell the person next to you in the grocery store that they might have a melanoma?) to research and publication ethics. This text provides a toolkit for handling tough situations in the clinic and beyond. The Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology publishes an Ethics Journal Club for which contributors can submit real-life practical ethical dilemmas, and the journal solicits a resolution or response from a dermatoethicist.



Additionally, a pilot curriculum project out of the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, Utah), of which I am a team member, currently is designing and testing several dermatoethics PowerPoint modules with the intention of making this material widely available through medical education portals.

The Hidden Curriculum

A formal curriculum can only provide so much when it comes to ethics training. In truth, much of what we learn as ethically minded dermatologists comes from our day-to-day practice.10 Paying attention to the more informal curriculum that we are immersed in during routine as well as unusual encounters also is important for achieving milestones. Teaching moments for thinking through ethical dilemmas abound, and this approach easily can be incorporated into routine workflow.11 Next time you encounter an ethical situation that gives you pause (eg, Can I biopsy an intubated patient without getting appropriate consent?), talk it through with your supervisor. Gems of autonomous practice often can be mined from these off-the-cuff conversations.

Can Professionalism Be Taught?

Finally, it is worth mentioning that while the number of resources available to dermatology residents for honing their ethics skills is increasing, ways of measuring the impact of this additional training in vivo are not.12 There are no good tools available to determine how ethics training influences resident behaviors. Similarly, there is no good evidence for what constitutes the most effective method for teaching medical ethics to trainees. It is a growing field with lots of room for more robust research. For now, the overall goal of a dermatoethics curriculum is to provide a mix of curriculum opportunities, ranging from formal lectures and readings to more informal conversations, with the hope of providing residents a toolbox for dealing with ethical dilemmas and a working knowledge of professionalism.

Final Thoughts

There are several resources available for dermatology programs to provide quality dermatoethics training to their residents. These can be mixed and matched to create a tailored formal curriculum alongside the more informal ethics training that happens in the clinic and on the wards. Providing this education is about more than just fulfilling accreditation requirements. Understanding ethical principles and how they can be applied to navigate sensitive situations is ultimately good for both professional and personal well-being.

As dermatology residents, we have a lot on our plates. With so many diagnoses to learn and treatments to understand, the sheer volume of knowledge we are expected to be familiar with sometimes can be overwhelming. The thought of adding yet another thing to the list of many things we already need to know—least of all a topic such as dermatoethics—may be unappealing. This article will discuss the importance of ethics training in dermatology residency as well as provide helpful resources for how this training can be achieved.

Professionalism as a Core Competency

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) considers professionalism as 1 of its 6 core competencies.1 These competencies provide a conceptual framework detailing the domains physicians should be proficient in before they can enter autonomous practice. When it comes to professionalism, residents are expected to demonstrate compassion, integrity, and respect for others; honesty with patients; respect for patient confidentiality and autonomy; appropriate relationships with patients; accountability to patients, society, and the profession; and a sensitivity and responsiveness to diverse patient population.1

The ACGME milestones are intended to assess resident development within the 6 competencies with more specific parameters for evaluation.2 Those pertaining to professionalism evaluate a resident’s ability to demonstrate professional behavior, an understanding of ethical principles, accountability, and conscientiousness, as well as self-awareness and the ability to seek help for personal or professional well-being. The crux of the kinds of activities that constitute acquisition of these professional skills are specialty specific. The ACGME ultimately believes that having a working knowledge of professionalism and ethical principles prepares residents for practicing medicine in the real world. Because of these requirements, residency programs are expected to provide resources for residents to explore ethical problems faced by dermatologists.

Beyond “Passing” Residency

The reality is that learning about medical ethics and practicing professional behavior is not just about ticking boxes to get ACGME accreditation or to “pass” residency. The data suggest that having a strong foundation in these principles is good for overall personal well-being, job satisfaction, and patient care. Studies have shown that unprofessional behavior in medical school is correlated to disciplinary action by state licensing boards against practicing physicians.3,4 In fact, a study found that in one cohort of physicians (N=68), 95% of disciplinary actions were for lapses in professionalism, which included activities such as sexual misconduct and inappropriate prescribing.4 Behaving appropriately protects your license to practice medicine.

Thinking through these problematic ethical scenarios also goes beyond coming up with the right answer. Exploring ethical conundrums is thought to develop analytical skills that can help one navigate future tricky situations that can be morally distressing and can lead to burnout. Introspection and self-awareness coupled with these skills ideally will help physicians think through sensitive and difficult situations with the courage to hold true to their convictions and ultimately uphold the professionalism of the specialty.5



Self-awareness has the additional bonus of empowering physicians to acknowledge personal and professional limitations with the goal of seeking help when it is needed before it is too late. It comes as no surprise that how we feel as physicians directly impacts how we treat our patients. One study found that depressed residents were more than 6 times more likely to make medication errors compared to nondepressed colleagues.6 Regularly taking stock of our professional and personal reserves can go a long way to improving overall well-being.

 

 

Resources for Dermatoethics Training

The best starting point for developing a robust dermatoethics curriculum is the material provided by the American Board of Dermatology, which is available online.7 An ad hoc subcommittee of the American Board of Dermatology composed of experts in dermatoethics and resident education reviewed relevant ethics literature and identified 6 core domains considered fundamental to dermatology resident education in ethics and professionalism.8 This team also provided a thorough list of relevant background readings for each topic. To cover pertinent material, the subcommittee recommended a 60-minute teaching session every other month with the intent of covering all the material over a 3-year period. If your program directors are not aware of this great resource and you feel your own ethics training may be lacking, bringing this up as a template might be helpful. A detailed description of an innovative dermatoethics curriculum organized at the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island) in 2001 also may serve as a guide for programs hoping to design their own approach.5

For those interested in self-study, there is an excellent text dedicated to dermatoethics, which is aptly entitled Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology.9 This book offers superb case-based discussions on a wide range of ethical quandaries that dermatologists may face, ranging from unsolicited dermatologic advice (eg, Is it wrong to tell the person next to you in the grocery store that they might have a melanoma?) to research and publication ethics. This text provides a toolkit for handling tough situations in the clinic and beyond. The Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology publishes an Ethics Journal Club for which contributors can submit real-life practical ethical dilemmas, and the journal solicits a resolution or response from a dermatoethicist.



Additionally, a pilot curriculum project out of the University of Utah (Salt Lake City, Utah), of which I am a team member, currently is designing and testing several dermatoethics PowerPoint modules with the intention of making this material widely available through medical education portals.

The Hidden Curriculum

A formal curriculum can only provide so much when it comes to ethics training. In truth, much of what we learn as ethically minded dermatologists comes from our day-to-day practice.10 Paying attention to the more informal curriculum that we are immersed in during routine as well as unusual encounters also is important for achieving milestones. Teaching moments for thinking through ethical dilemmas abound, and this approach easily can be incorporated into routine workflow.11 Next time you encounter an ethical situation that gives you pause (eg, Can I biopsy an intubated patient without getting appropriate consent?), talk it through with your supervisor. Gems of autonomous practice often can be mined from these off-the-cuff conversations.

Can Professionalism Be Taught?

Finally, it is worth mentioning that while the number of resources available to dermatology residents for honing their ethics skills is increasing, ways of measuring the impact of this additional training in vivo are not.12 There are no good tools available to determine how ethics training influences resident behaviors. Similarly, there is no good evidence for what constitutes the most effective method for teaching medical ethics to trainees. It is a growing field with lots of room for more robust research. For now, the overall goal of a dermatoethics curriculum is to provide a mix of curriculum opportunities, ranging from formal lectures and readings to more informal conversations, with the hope of providing residents a toolbox for dealing with ethical dilemmas and a working knowledge of professionalism.

Final Thoughts

There are several resources available for dermatology programs to provide quality dermatoethics training to their residents. These can be mixed and matched to create a tailored formal curriculum alongside the more informal ethics training that happens in the clinic and on the wards. Providing this education is about more than just fulfilling accreditation requirements. Understanding ethical principles and how they can be applied to navigate sensitive situations is ultimately good for both professional and personal well-being.

References
  1. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME common program requirements (residency). ACGME website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidency2020.pdf
  2. Edgar L, McLean S, Hogan SO, et al. The milestones guidebook. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed June 10, 2021. acgme.org/portals/0/MilestonesGuidebook.pdf
  3. Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA, et al. Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2673-2682.
  4. Papadakis MA, Hodgson CS, Teherani A, et al. Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board. Acad Med. 2004;79:244-249.
  5. Bercovitch L, Long TP. Dermatoethics: a curriculum in bioethics and professionalism for dermatology residents at Brown Medical School. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56:679-682.
  6. Fahrenkopf AM, Sectish TC, Barger LK, et al. Rates of medication errors among depressed and burnt out residents: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2008;336:488-491.
  7. Recommended topics for 3-year dermatoethics curricular cycle. American Board of Dermatology website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.abderm.org/residents-and-fellows/dermatoethics.aspx
  8. Stoff BK, Grant-Kels JM, Brodell RT, et al. Introducing a curriculum in ethics and professionalism for dermatology residencies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1032-1034.
  9. Bercovitch L, Perlis C, Stoff BK, et al, eds. Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing; 2021.
  10. Hafferty FW, Franks R. The hidden curriculum, ethics teaching, and the structure of medical education. Acad Med. 1994;69:861-871.
  11. Aldrich N, Mostow E. Incorporating teaching dermatoethics in a busy outpatient clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:423-424.
  12. de la Garza S, Phuoc V, Throneberry S, et al. Teaching medical ethics in graduate and undergraduate medical education: a systematic review of effectiveness. Acad Psychiatry. 2017;41:520-525.
References
  1. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACGME common program requirements (residency). ACGME website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.acgme.org/Portals/0/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidency2020.pdf
  2. Edgar L, McLean S, Hogan SO, et al. The milestones guidebook. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed June 10, 2021. acgme.org/portals/0/MilestonesGuidebook.pdf
  3. Papadakis MA, Teherani A, Banach MA, et al. Disciplinary action by medical boards and prior behavior in medical school. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2673-2682.
  4. Papadakis MA, Hodgson CS, Teherani A, et al. Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board. Acad Med. 2004;79:244-249.
  5. Bercovitch L, Long TP. Dermatoethics: a curriculum in bioethics and professionalism for dermatology residents at Brown Medical School. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56:679-682.
  6. Fahrenkopf AM, Sectish TC, Barger LK, et al. Rates of medication errors among depressed and burnt out residents: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2008;336:488-491.
  7. Recommended topics for 3-year dermatoethics curricular cycle. American Board of Dermatology website. Accessed June 10, 2021. https://www.abderm.org/residents-and-fellows/dermatoethics.aspx
  8. Stoff BK, Grant-Kels JM, Brodell RT, et al. Introducing a curriculum in ethics and professionalism for dermatology residencies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1032-1034.
  9. Bercovitch L, Perlis C, Stoff BK, et al, eds. Dermatoethics: Contemporary Ethics and Professionalism in Dermatology. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing; 2021.
  10. Hafferty FW, Franks R. The hidden curriculum, ethics teaching, and the structure of medical education. Acad Med. 1994;69:861-871.
  11. Aldrich N, Mostow E. Incorporating teaching dermatoethics in a busy outpatient clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:423-424.
  12. de la Garza S, Phuoc V, Throneberry S, et al. Teaching medical ethics in graduate and undergraduate medical education: a systematic review of effectiveness. Acad Psychiatry. 2017;41:520-525.
Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Page Number
E15-E17
Page Number
E15-E17
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearls

  • Professionalism is one of the 6 core competencies used by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) to evaluate physician preparedness for autonomous practice. Dermatology residency programs are expected to provide resources for achieving this competency.
  • Several resources for exploring ethical issues in dermatology are available and can be utilized to create a formal curriculum alongside the more tacit learning that takes place in daily practice.
  • Learning about ethical principles and their application can ultimately help practicing physicians avoid disciplinary action and improve overall well-being.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

USMLE Step 1 Changes: Dermatology Program Director Perspectives and Implications

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 06/15/2021 - 10:51

To the Editor:

With a trend toward increasing pass/fail medical school curricula, residency program directors (PDs) have relied on the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 as an objective measurement of applicant achievement, which is particularly true in competitive subspecialties such as dermatology, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, and neurosurgery, in which reported Step 1 scores are consistently the highest among matched applicants.1 Program directors in dermatology have indicated that Step 1 scores are a priority when considering an applicant.2 However, among PDs, the general perception of plans to change Step 1 scores to pass/fail has largely been negative.3 Although the impact of this change on the dermatology residency selection process remains unknown, we undertook a study to determine dermatology PDs’ perspectives on the scoring change and discuss its potential implications among all competitive specialties.

A 19-question survey was designed that assessed PD demographics and opinions of the changes and potential implications of the Step 1 scoring change (eTable). A list of current US dermatology PDs at osteopathic and allopathic programs was obtained through the 2019-2020 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education list of accredited programs. Surveys were piloted at our institution to assess for internal validity and misleading questions, and then were distributed electronically through REDCap software (https://www.project-redcap.org/). All responses were kept anonymous. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Variables were assessed with means, proportions, and CIs. Results were deemed statistically significant with nonoverlapping 99% CIs (P<.01).



Of 139 surveys, 57 (41.0%) were completed. Most PDs (54.4% [31/57]) were women. The average years of service as a PD was 8.5 years. Most PDs (61.4% [35/57]) disagreed with the scoring change; 77.2% (44/57) of PDs noted that it would make it difficult to objectively assess candidates. Program directors indicated that this change would increase the emphasis they place on USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores (86.0% [49/57]); 78.2% (43/55) reported that they would start requiring Step 2 CK results with submitted applications.

Meanwhile, 73.7% (42/57) of PDs disagreed that Step 2 CK should be changed to pass/fail. Most PDs (50.9% [29/57]) thought that binary Step 1 scoring would increase the importance of medical school reputation in application decisions. The percentage of PDs who were neutral (eTable) on whether pass/fail scoring would place international graduates at a disadvantage was 52.6% (30/57), decrease socioeconomic disparities in the application process was 46.4% (26/56), and improve student well-being was 38.2% (21/55).

Results of our survey indicate generally negative perceptions by dermatology PDs to pass/fail scoring of the USMLE Step 1. A primary goal of introducing binary scoring in both medical school grading and the USMLE was to improve student well-being, as traditional grading systems have been associated with a higher rate of medical student burnout.4-6 However, PDs were equivocal about such an impact on student well-being. Furthermore, PDs indicated that the importance of objective measures would merely shift to the USMLE Step 2 CK, which will still be graded with a 3-digit numeric score. Therefore, Step 2 likely will become the source of anxiety for medical students that was once synonymous with Step 1.

Another goal of the scoring change was to encourage a more holistic approach to applicant review, rather than focusing on numerical metrics. However, with most curricula adopting pass/fail models, there is already a lack of objective measures. Although removal of USMLE Step 1 scores could increase the focus on subjective measures, such as letters of recommendation and rank in medical school class (as indicated by our survey), these are susceptible to bias and may not be the best indicators of applicant suitability. This finding also is concerning for maintaining an equitable application process: PDs indicated that the USMLE Step 1 scoring change would not decrease socioeconomic disparities within the selection process.



In dermatology and other competitive specialties, in which USMLE Step 1 scores have become an important consideration, PDs and residency programs will need to identify additional metrics to compare applicants. Examples include research productivity, grades on relevant rotations, and shelf examination scores. Although more reliable subjective measures, such as interviews and performance on away rotations, are already important, they may become of greater significance.

The findings of our survey suggest that PDs are skeptical about changes to Step 1 and more diligence is necessary to maintain a fair and impartial selection process. Increased emphasis on other objective measurements, such as shelf examination scores, graded curricular components, and research productivity, could help maintain an unbiased approach. With changes to USMLE Step 1 expected to be implemented in the 2022 application cycle, programs may need to explore additional options to maintain reliable and transparent applicant review practices.

References
  1. National Resident Matching Program. Charting Outcomes in the Match: U.S Allopathic Seniors, 2018. 2nd ed. National Resident Matching Program; July 2018. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Seniors.pdf
  2. Grading systems use by US medical schools. Association of American Medical Colleges. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/curriculum-reports/interactive-data/grading-systems-use-us-medical-schools
  3. Makhoul AT, Pontell ME, Ganesh Kumar N, et al. Objective measures needed—program directors’ perspectives on a pass/fail USMLE Step 1. N Engl J Med; 2020;382:2389-2392. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2006148
  4. Change to pass/fail score reporting for Step 1. United States Medical Licensing Examination. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/incus/
  5. Reed DA, Shanafelt TD, Satele DW, et al. Relationship of pass/fail grading and curriculum structure with well-being among preclinical medical students: a multi-institutional study. Acad Med. 2011;86:1367-1373. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182305d81
  6. Summary report and preliminary recommendations from the Invitational Conference on USMLE Scoring (InCUS). United States Medical Licensing Examination. March 11-12, 2019. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/pdfs/incus/incus_summary_report.pdf
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Patrinely and Zakria are from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee. Dr. Drolet is from the Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable appears in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.Correspondence: Brian C. Drolet, MD, D-4207 Medical Center North, 1161 21st Ave S, Nashville, TN 37212 ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
293-294, E1
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Patrinely and Zakria are from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee. Dr. Drolet is from the Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable appears in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.Correspondence: Brian C. Drolet, MD, D-4207 Medical Center North, 1161 21st Ave S, Nashville, TN 37212 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Patrinely and Zakria are from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee. Dr. Drolet is from the Department of Plastic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable appears in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.Correspondence: Brian C. Drolet, MD, D-4207 Medical Center North, 1161 21st Ave S, Nashville, TN 37212 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

To the Editor:

With a trend toward increasing pass/fail medical school curricula, residency program directors (PDs) have relied on the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 as an objective measurement of applicant achievement, which is particularly true in competitive subspecialties such as dermatology, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, and neurosurgery, in which reported Step 1 scores are consistently the highest among matched applicants.1 Program directors in dermatology have indicated that Step 1 scores are a priority when considering an applicant.2 However, among PDs, the general perception of plans to change Step 1 scores to pass/fail has largely been negative.3 Although the impact of this change on the dermatology residency selection process remains unknown, we undertook a study to determine dermatology PDs’ perspectives on the scoring change and discuss its potential implications among all competitive specialties.

A 19-question survey was designed that assessed PD demographics and opinions of the changes and potential implications of the Step 1 scoring change (eTable). A list of current US dermatology PDs at osteopathic and allopathic programs was obtained through the 2019-2020 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education list of accredited programs. Surveys were piloted at our institution to assess for internal validity and misleading questions, and then were distributed electronically through REDCap software (https://www.project-redcap.org/). All responses were kept anonymous. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Variables were assessed with means, proportions, and CIs. Results were deemed statistically significant with nonoverlapping 99% CIs (P<.01).



Of 139 surveys, 57 (41.0%) were completed. Most PDs (54.4% [31/57]) were women. The average years of service as a PD was 8.5 years. Most PDs (61.4% [35/57]) disagreed with the scoring change; 77.2% (44/57) of PDs noted that it would make it difficult to objectively assess candidates. Program directors indicated that this change would increase the emphasis they place on USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores (86.0% [49/57]); 78.2% (43/55) reported that they would start requiring Step 2 CK results with submitted applications.

Meanwhile, 73.7% (42/57) of PDs disagreed that Step 2 CK should be changed to pass/fail. Most PDs (50.9% [29/57]) thought that binary Step 1 scoring would increase the importance of medical school reputation in application decisions. The percentage of PDs who were neutral (eTable) on whether pass/fail scoring would place international graduates at a disadvantage was 52.6% (30/57), decrease socioeconomic disparities in the application process was 46.4% (26/56), and improve student well-being was 38.2% (21/55).

Results of our survey indicate generally negative perceptions by dermatology PDs to pass/fail scoring of the USMLE Step 1. A primary goal of introducing binary scoring in both medical school grading and the USMLE was to improve student well-being, as traditional grading systems have been associated with a higher rate of medical student burnout.4-6 However, PDs were equivocal about such an impact on student well-being. Furthermore, PDs indicated that the importance of objective measures would merely shift to the USMLE Step 2 CK, which will still be graded with a 3-digit numeric score. Therefore, Step 2 likely will become the source of anxiety for medical students that was once synonymous with Step 1.

Another goal of the scoring change was to encourage a more holistic approach to applicant review, rather than focusing on numerical metrics. However, with most curricula adopting pass/fail models, there is already a lack of objective measures. Although removal of USMLE Step 1 scores could increase the focus on subjective measures, such as letters of recommendation and rank in medical school class (as indicated by our survey), these are susceptible to bias and may not be the best indicators of applicant suitability. This finding also is concerning for maintaining an equitable application process: PDs indicated that the USMLE Step 1 scoring change would not decrease socioeconomic disparities within the selection process.



In dermatology and other competitive specialties, in which USMLE Step 1 scores have become an important consideration, PDs and residency programs will need to identify additional metrics to compare applicants. Examples include research productivity, grades on relevant rotations, and shelf examination scores. Although more reliable subjective measures, such as interviews and performance on away rotations, are already important, they may become of greater significance.

The findings of our survey suggest that PDs are skeptical about changes to Step 1 and more diligence is necessary to maintain a fair and impartial selection process. Increased emphasis on other objective measurements, such as shelf examination scores, graded curricular components, and research productivity, could help maintain an unbiased approach. With changes to USMLE Step 1 expected to be implemented in the 2022 application cycle, programs may need to explore additional options to maintain reliable and transparent applicant review practices.

To the Editor:

With a trend toward increasing pass/fail medical school curricula, residency program directors (PDs) have relied on the US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 as an objective measurement of applicant achievement, which is particularly true in competitive subspecialties such as dermatology, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmology, and neurosurgery, in which reported Step 1 scores are consistently the highest among matched applicants.1 Program directors in dermatology have indicated that Step 1 scores are a priority when considering an applicant.2 However, among PDs, the general perception of plans to change Step 1 scores to pass/fail has largely been negative.3 Although the impact of this change on the dermatology residency selection process remains unknown, we undertook a study to determine dermatology PDs’ perspectives on the scoring change and discuss its potential implications among all competitive specialties.

A 19-question survey was designed that assessed PD demographics and opinions of the changes and potential implications of the Step 1 scoring change (eTable). A list of current US dermatology PDs at osteopathic and allopathic programs was obtained through the 2019-2020 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education list of accredited programs. Surveys were piloted at our institution to assess for internal validity and misleading questions, and then were distributed electronically through REDCap software (https://www.project-redcap.org/). All responses were kept anonymous. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Variables were assessed with means, proportions, and CIs. Results were deemed statistically significant with nonoverlapping 99% CIs (P<.01).



Of 139 surveys, 57 (41.0%) were completed. Most PDs (54.4% [31/57]) were women. The average years of service as a PD was 8.5 years. Most PDs (61.4% [35/57]) disagreed with the scoring change; 77.2% (44/57) of PDs noted that it would make it difficult to objectively assess candidates. Program directors indicated that this change would increase the emphasis they place on USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores (86.0% [49/57]); 78.2% (43/55) reported that they would start requiring Step 2 CK results with submitted applications.

Meanwhile, 73.7% (42/57) of PDs disagreed that Step 2 CK should be changed to pass/fail. Most PDs (50.9% [29/57]) thought that binary Step 1 scoring would increase the importance of medical school reputation in application decisions. The percentage of PDs who were neutral (eTable) on whether pass/fail scoring would place international graduates at a disadvantage was 52.6% (30/57), decrease socioeconomic disparities in the application process was 46.4% (26/56), and improve student well-being was 38.2% (21/55).

Results of our survey indicate generally negative perceptions by dermatology PDs to pass/fail scoring of the USMLE Step 1. A primary goal of introducing binary scoring in both medical school grading and the USMLE was to improve student well-being, as traditional grading systems have been associated with a higher rate of medical student burnout.4-6 However, PDs were equivocal about such an impact on student well-being. Furthermore, PDs indicated that the importance of objective measures would merely shift to the USMLE Step 2 CK, which will still be graded with a 3-digit numeric score. Therefore, Step 2 likely will become the source of anxiety for medical students that was once synonymous with Step 1.

Another goal of the scoring change was to encourage a more holistic approach to applicant review, rather than focusing on numerical metrics. However, with most curricula adopting pass/fail models, there is already a lack of objective measures. Although removal of USMLE Step 1 scores could increase the focus on subjective measures, such as letters of recommendation and rank in medical school class (as indicated by our survey), these are susceptible to bias and may not be the best indicators of applicant suitability. This finding also is concerning for maintaining an equitable application process: PDs indicated that the USMLE Step 1 scoring change would not decrease socioeconomic disparities within the selection process.



In dermatology and other competitive specialties, in which USMLE Step 1 scores have become an important consideration, PDs and residency programs will need to identify additional metrics to compare applicants. Examples include research productivity, grades on relevant rotations, and shelf examination scores. Although more reliable subjective measures, such as interviews and performance on away rotations, are already important, they may become of greater significance.

The findings of our survey suggest that PDs are skeptical about changes to Step 1 and more diligence is necessary to maintain a fair and impartial selection process. Increased emphasis on other objective measurements, such as shelf examination scores, graded curricular components, and research productivity, could help maintain an unbiased approach. With changes to USMLE Step 1 expected to be implemented in the 2022 application cycle, programs may need to explore additional options to maintain reliable and transparent applicant review practices.

References
  1. National Resident Matching Program. Charting Outcomes in the Match: U.S Allopathic Seniors, 2018. 2nd ed. National Resident Matching Program; July 2018. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Seniors.pdf
  2. Grading systems use by US medical schools. Association of American Medical Colleges. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/curriculum-reports/interactive-data/grading-systems-use-us-medical-schools
  3. Makhoul AT, Pontell ME, Ganesh Kumar N, et al. Objective measures needed—program directors’ perspectives on a pass/fail USMLE Step 1. N Engl J Med; 2020;382:2389-2392. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2006148
  4. Change to pass/fail score reporting for Step 1. United States Medical Licensing Examination. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/incus/
  5. Reed DA, Shanafelt TD, Satele DW, et al. Relationship of pass/fail grading and curriculum structure with well-being among preclinical medical students: a multi-institutional study. Acad Med. 2011;86:1367-1373. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182305d81
  6. Summary report and preliminary recommendations from the Invitational Conference on USMLE Scoring (InCUS). United States Medical Licensing Examination. March 11-12, 2019. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/pdfs/incus/incus_summary_report.pdf
References
  1. National Resident Matching Program. Charting Outcomes in the Match: U.S Allopathic Seniors, 2018. 2nd ed. National Resident Matching Program; July 2018. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.nrmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Charting-Outcomes-in-the-Match-2018-Seniors.pdf
  2. Grading systems use by US medical schools. Association of American Medical Colleges. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/curriculum-reports/interactive-data/grading-systems-use-us-medical-schools
  3. Makhoul AT, Pontell ME, Ganesh Kumar N, et al. Objective measures needed—program directors’ perspectives on a pass/fail USMLE Step 1. N Engl J Med; 2020;382:2389-2392. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2006148
  4. Change to pass/fail score reporting for Step 1. United States Medical Licensing Examination. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/incus/
  5. Reed DA, Shanafelt TD, Satele DW, et al. Relationship of pass/fail grading and curriculum structure with well-being among preclinical medical students: a multi-institutional study. Acad Med. 2011;86:1367-1373. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182305d81
  6. Summary report and preliminary recommendations from the Invitational Conference on USMLE Scoring (InCUS). United States Medical Licensing Examination. March 11-12, 2019. Accessed May 12, 2021. https://www.usmle.org/pdfs/incus/incus_summary_report.pdf
Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Issue
cutis - 107(6)
Page Number
293-294, E1
Page Number
293-294, E1
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Practice Points

  • The changes to US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 were met with mixed reactions from dermatology program directors.
  • These changes likely will increase the emphasis on USMLE Step 2 and other objective measures.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

The Power of a Multidisciplinary Tumor Board: Managing Unresectable and/or High-Risk Skin Cancers

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 06/02/2021 - 15:17

Multidisciplinary tumor boards are composed of providers from many fields who deliver coordinated care for patients with unresectable and high-risk skin cancers. Providers who comprise the tumor board often are radiation oncologists, hematologists/oncologists, general surgeons, dermatologists, dermatologic surgeons, and pathologists. The benefit of having a tumor board is that each patient is evaluated simultaneously by a group of physicians from various specialties who bring diverse perspectives that will contribute to the overall treatment plan. The cases often encompass high-risk tumors including unresectable basal cell carcinomas or invasive melanomas. By combining knowledge from each specialty in a team approach, the tumor board can effectively and holistically develop a care plan for each patient.

For the tumor board at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island), we often prepare a presentation with comprehensive details about the patient and tumor. During the presentation, we also propose a treatment plan prior to describing each patient at the weekly conference and amend the plans during the discussion. Tumor boards also provide a consulting role to the community and hospital providers in which patients are being referred by their primary provider and are seeking a second opinion or guidance.

In many ways, the tumor board is a multidisciplinary approach for patient advocacy in the form of treatment. These physicians meet on a regular basis to check on the patient’s progress and continually reevaluate how to have discussions about the patient’s care. There are many reasons why it is important to refer patients to a multidisciplinary tumor board.

Improved Workup and Diagnosis

One of the values of a tumor board is that it allows for patient data to be collected and assembled in a way that tells a story. The specialist from each field can then discuss and weigh the benefits and risks for each diagnostic test that should be performed for the workup in each patient. Physicians who refer their patients to the tumor board use their recommendations to both confirm the diagnosis and shift their treatment plans, depending on the information presented during the meeting.1 There may be a change in the tumor type, decision to refer for surgery, cancer staging, and list of viable options, especially after reviewing pathology and imaging.2 The discussion of the treatment plan may consider not only surgical considerations but also the patient’s quality of life. At times, noninvasive interventions are more appropriate and align with the patient’s goals of care. In addition, during the tumor board clinic there may be new tumors that are identified and biopsied, providing increased diagnosis and surveillance for patients who may have a higher risk for developing skin cancer.

Education for Residents and Providers

The multidisciplinary tumor board not only helps patients but also educates both residents and providers on the evidence-based therapeutic management of high-risk tumors.2 Research literature on cutaneous oncology is dynamic, and the weekly tumor board meetings help providers stay informed about the best and most effective treatments for their patients.3 In addition to the attending specialists, participants of the tumor board also may include residents, medical students, medical assistance staff, nurses, physician assistants, and fellows. Furthermore, the recommendations given by the tumor board serve to educate both the patient and the provider who referred them to the tumor board. Although we have access to excellent dermatology textbooks as residents, the most impactful educational experience is seeing the patients in tumor board clinic and participating in the immensely educational discussions at the weekly conferences. Through this experience, I have learned that treatment plans should be personalized to the patient. There are many factors to take into consideration when deciphering what the best course of treatment will be for a patient. Sometimes the best option is Mohs micrographic surgery, while other times it may be scheduling several sessions of palliative radiation oncology. Treatment depends on the individual patient and their condition.

Coordination of Care

During a week that I was on call, I was consulted to biopsy a patient with a giant hemorrhagic basal cell carcinoma that caused substantial cheek and nose distortion as well as anemia secondary to acute blood loss. The patient not only did not have a dermatologist but also did not have a primary care physician given he had not had contact with the health care system in more than 30 years. The reason for him not seeking care was multifactorial, but the approach to his care became multidisciplinary. We sought to connect him with the right providers to help him in any way that we could. We presented him at our multidisciplinary tumor board and started him on sonedigib, a medication that binds to and inhibits the smoothened protein.4 Through the tumor board, we were able to establish sustained contact with the patient. The tumor board created effective communication between providers to get him the referrals that he needed for dermatology, pathology, radiation oncology, hematology/oncology, and otolaryngology. The discussions centered around being cognizant of the patient’s apprehension with the health care system as well as providing medical and surgical treatment that would help his quality of life. We built a consensus on what the best plan was for the patient and his family. This consensus would have been more difficult had it not been for the combined specialties of the tumor board. In general, studies have shown that weekly tumor boards have resulted in decreased mortality rates for patients with advanced cancers.5

Final Thoughts

The multidisciplinary tumor board is a powerful resource for hospitals and the greater medical community. At these weekly conferences you realize there may still be hope that begins at the line where your expertise ends. It represents a team of providers who compassionately refuse to give up on patients when they are the last refuge.

References
  1. Foster TJ, Bouchard-Fortier A, Olivotto IA, et al. Effect of multidisciplinary case conferences on physician decision making: breast diagnostic rounds. Cureus. 2016;8:E895.
  2. El Saghir NS, Charara RN, Kreidieh FY, et al. Global practice and efficiency of multidisciplinary tumor boards: results of an American Society of Clinical Oncology international survey. J Glob Oncol. 2015;1:57-64.
  3. Mori S, Navarrete-Dechent C, Petukhova TA, et al. Tumor board conferences for multidisciplinary skin cancer management: a survey of US cancer centers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018;16:1209-1215.
  4. Dummer R, Ascierto PA, Basset-Seguin N, et al. Sonidegib and vismodegib in the treatment of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma: a joint expert opinion. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1944-1956.
  5. Kehl KL, Landrum MB, Kahn KL, et al. Tumor board participation among physicians caring for patients with lung or colorectal cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11:E267-E278.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 107(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E22-E23
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

Multidisciplinary tumor boards are composed of providers from many fields who deliver coordinated care for patients with unresectable and high-risk skin cancers. Providers who comprise the tumor board often are radiation oncologists, hematologists/oncologists, general surgeons, dermatologists, dermatologic surgeons, and pathologists. The benefit of having a tumor board is that each patient is evaluated simultaneously by a group of physicians from various specialties who bring diverse perspectives that will contribute to the overall treatment plan. The cases often encompass high-risk tumors including unresectable basal cell carcinomas or invasive melanomas. By combining knowledge from each specialty in a team approach, the tumor board can effectively and holistically develop a care plan for each patient.

For the tumor board at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island), we often prepare a presentation with comprehensive details about the patient and tumor. During the presentation, we also propose a treatment plan prior to describing each patient at the weekly conference and amend the plans during the discussion. Tumor boards also provide a consulting role to the community and hospital providers in which patients are being referred by their primary provider and are seeking a second opinion or guidance.

In many ways, the tumor board is a multidisciplinary approach for patient advocacy in the form of treatment. These physicians meet on a regular basis to check on the patient’s progress and continually reevaluate how to have discussions about the patient’s care. There are many reasons why it is important to refer patients to a multidisciplinary tumor board.

Improved Workup and Diagnosis

One of the values of a tumor board is that it allows for patient data to be collected and assembled in a way that tells a story. The specialist from each field can then discuss and weigh the benefits and risks for each diagnostic test that should be performed for the workup in each patient. Physicians who refer their patients to the tumor board use their recommendations to both confirm the diagnosis and shift their treatment plans, depending on the information presented during the meeting.1 There may be a change in the tumor type, decision to refer for surgery, cancer staging, and list of viable options, especially after reviewing pathology and imaging.2 The discussion of the treatment plan may consider not only surgical considerations but also the patient’s quality of life. At times, noninvasive interventions are more appropriate and align with the patient’s goals of care. In addition, during the tumor board clinic there may be new tumors that are identified and biopsied, providing increased diagnosis and surveillance for patients who may have a higher risk for developing skin cancer.

Education for Residents and Providers

The multidisciplinary tumor board not only helps patients but also educates both residents and providers on the evidence-based therapeutic management of high-risk tumors.2 Research literature on cutaneous oncology is dynamic, and the weekly tumor board meetings help providers stay informed about the best and most effective treatments for their patients.3 In addition to the attending specialists, participants of the tumor board also may include residents, medical students, medical assistance staff, nurses, physician assistants, and fellows. Furthermore, the recommendations given by the tumor board serve to educate both the patient and the provider who referred them to the tumor board. Although we have access to excellent dermatology textbooks as residents, the most impactful educational experience is seeing the patients in tumor board clinic and participating in the immensely educational discussions at the weekly conferences. Through this experience, I have learned that treatment plans should be personalized to the patient. There are many factors to take into consideration when deciphering what the best course of treatment will be for a patient. Sometimes the best option is Mohs micrographic surgery, while other times it may be scheduling several sessions of palliative radiation oncology. Treatment depends on the individual patient and their condition.

Coordination of Care

During a week that I was on call, I was consulted to biopsy a patient with a giant hemorrhagic basal cell carcinoma that caused substantial cheek and nose distortion as well as anemia secondary to acute blood loss. The patient not only did not have a dermatologist but also did not have a primary care physician given he had not had contact with the health care system in more than 30 years. The reason for him not seeking care was multifactorial, but the approach to his care became multidisciplinary. We sought to connect him with the right providers to help him in any way that we could. We presented him at our multidisciplinary tumor board and started him on sonedigib, a medication that binds to and inhibits the smoothened protein.4 Through the tumor board, we were able to establish sustained contact with the patient. The tumor board created effective communication between providers to get him the referrals that he needed for dermatology, pathology, radiation oncology, hematology/oncology, and otolaryngology. The discussions centered around being cognizant of the patient’s apprehension with the health care system as well as providing medical and surgical treatment that would help his quality of life. We built a consensus on what the best plan was for the patient and his family. This consensus would have been more difficult had it not been for the combined specialties of the tumor board. In general, studies have shown that weekly tumor boards have resulted in decreased mortality rates for patients with advanced cancers.5

Final Thoughts

The multidisciplinary tumor board is a powerful resource for hospitals and the greater medical community. At these weekly conferences you realize there may still be hope that begins at the line where your expertise ends. It represents a team of providers who compassionately refuse to give up on patients when they are the last refuge.

Multidisciplinary tumor boards are composed of providers from many fields who deliver coordinated care for patients with unresectable and high-risk skin cancers. Providers who comprise the tumor board often are radiation oncologists, hematologists/oncologists, general surgeons, dermatologists, dermatologic surgeons, and pathologists. The benefit of having a tumor board is that each patient is evaluated simultaneously by a group of physicians from various specialties who bring diverse perspectives that will contribute to the overall treatment plan. The cases often encompass high-risk tumors including unresectable basal cell carcinomas or invasive melanomas. By combining knowledge from each specialty in a team approach, the tumor board can effectively and holistically develop a care plan for each patient.

For the tumor board at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University (Providence, Rhode Island), we often prepare a presentation with comprehensive details about the patient and tumor. During the presentation, we also propose a treatment plan prior to describing each patient at the weekly conference and amend the plans during the discussion. Tumor boards also provide a consulting role to the community and hospital providers in which patients are being referred by their primary provider and are seeking a second opinion or guidance.

In many ways, the tumor board is a multidisciplinary approach for patient advocacy in the form of treatment. These physicians meet on a regular basis to check on the patient’s progress and continually reevaluate how to have discussions about the patient’s care. There are many reasons why it is important to refer patients to a multidisciplinary tumor board.

Improved Workup and Diagnosis

One of the values of a tumor board is that it allows for patient data to be collected and assembled in a way that tells a story. The specialist from each field can then discuss and weigh the benefits and risks for each diagnostic test that should be performed for the workup in each patient. Physicians who refer their patients to the tumor board use their recommendations to both confirm the diagnosis and shift their treatment plans, depending on the information presented during the meeting.1 There may be a change in the tumor type, decision to refer for surgery, cancer staging, and list of viable options, especially after reviewing pathology and imaging.2 The discussion of the treatment plan may consider not only surgical considerations but also the patient’s quality of life. At times, noninvasive interventions are more appropriate and align with the patient’s goals of care. In addition, during the tumor board clinic there may be new tumors that are identified and biopsied, providing increased diagnosis and surveillance for patients who may have a higher risk for developing skin cancer.

Education for Residents and Providers

The multidisciplinary tumor board not only helps patients but also educates both residents and providers on the evidence-based therapeutic management of high-risk tumors.2 Research literature on cutaneous oncology is dynamic, and the weekly tumor board meetings help providers stay informed about the best and most effective treatments for their patients.3 In addition to the attending specialists, participants of the tumor board also may include residents, medical students, medical assistance staff, nurses, physician assistants, and fellows. Furthermore, the recommendations given by the tumor board serve to educate both the patient and the provider who referred them to the tumor board. Although we have access to excellent dermatology textbooks as residents, the most impactful educational experience is seeing the patients in tumor board clinic and participating in the immensely educational discussions at the weekly conferences. Through this experience, I have learned that treatment plans should be personalized to the patient. There are many factors to take into consideration when deciphering what the best course of treatment will be for a patient. Sometimes the best option is Mohs micrographic surgery, while other times it may be scheduling several sessions of palliative radiation oncology. Treatment depends on the individual patient and their condition.

Coordination of Care

During a week that I was on call, I was consulted to biopsy a patient with a giant hemorrhagic basal cell carcinoma that caused substantial cheek and nose distortion as well as anemia secondary to acute blood loss. The patient not only did not have a dermatologist but also did not have a primary care physician given he had not had contact with the health care system in more than 30 years. The reason for him not seeking care was multifactorial, but the approach to his care became multidisciplinary. We sought to connect him with the right providers to help him in any way that we could. We presented him at our multidisciplinary tumor board and started him on sonedigib, a medication that binds to and inhibits the smoothened protein.4 Through the tumor board, we were able to establish sustained contact with the patient. The tumor board created effective communication between providers to get him the referrals that he needed for dermatology, pathology, radiation oncology, hematology/oncology, and otolaryngology. The discussions centered around being cognizant of the patient’s apprehension with the health care system as well as providing medical and surgical treatment that would help his quality of life. We built a consensus on what the best plan was for the patient and his family. This consensus would have been more difficult had it not been for the combined specialties of the tumor board. In general, studies have shown that weekly tumor boards have resulted in decreased mortality rates for patients with advanced cancers.5

Final Thoughts

The multidisciplinary tumor board is a powerful resource for hospitals and the greater medical community. At these weekly conferences you realize there may still be hope that begins at the line where your expertise ends. It represents a team of providers who compassionately refuse to give up on patients when they are the last refuge.

References
  1. Foster TJ, Bouchard-Fortier A, Olivotto IA, et al. Effect of multidisciplinary case conferences on physician decision making: breast diagnostic rounds. Cureus. 2016;8:E895.
  2. El Saghir NS, Charara RN, Kreidieh FY, et al. Global practice and efficiency of multidisciplinary tumor boards: results of an American Society of Clinical Oncology international survey. J Glob Oncol. 2015;1:57-64.
  3. Mori S, Navarrete-Dechent C, Petukhova TA, et al. Tumor board conferences for multidisciplinary skin cancer management: a survey of US cancer centers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018;16:1209-1215.
  4. Dummer R, Ascierto PA, Basset-Seguin N, et al. Sonidegib and vismodegib in the treatment of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma: a joint expert opinion. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1944-1956.
  5. Kehl KL, Landrum MB, Kahn KL, et al. Tumor board participation among physicians caring for patients with lung or colorectal cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11:E267-E278.
References
  1. Foster TJ, Bouchard-Fortier A, Olivotto IA, et al. Effect of multidisciplinary case conferences on physician decision making: breast diagnostic rounds. Cureus. 2016;8:E895.
  2. El Saghir NS, Charara RN, Kreidieh FY, et al. Global practice and efficiency of multidisciplinary tumor boards: results of an American Society of Clinical Oncology international survey. J Glob Oncol. 2015;1:57-64.
  3. Mori S, Navarrete-Dechent C, Petukhova TA, et al. Tumor board conferences for multidisciplinary skin cancer management: a survey of US cancer centers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018;16:1209-1215.
  4. Dummer R, Ascierto PA, Basset-Seguin N, et al. Sonidegib and vismodegib in the treatment of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma: a joint expert opinion. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1944-1956.
  5. Kehl KL, Landrum MB, Kahn KL, et al. Tumor board participation among physicians caring for patients with lung or colorectal cancer. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11:E267-E278.
Issue
Cutis - 107(5)
Issue
Cutis - 107(5)
Page Number
E22-E23
Page Number
E22-E23
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Participating in a multidisciplinary tumor board allows residents to learn more about how to manage and treat high-risk skin cancers. The multidisciplinary team approach provides high-quality care for challenging patients.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Long-Distance Dermatology: Lessons From an Interview on Remote Practice During a Pandemic and Beyond

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 04/28/2021 - 12:33

For the US health care system, the year 2020 was one of great change as well as extreme pain and hardship: some physical, but much emotional and financial. Dermatologists nationwide have not been sheltered from the winds of change. Yet as with most great challenges, one also can discern great change for the better if you look for it. One area of major growth in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is the expansion of telehealth, specifically teledermatology.

Prior to the pandemic, teledermatology was in a phase of modest expansion.1 Since the start of the pandemic, however, the adoption of telemedicine services in the United States has been beyond exponential. Before the pandemic, an estimated 15,000 Medicare recipients received telehealth services on a weekly basis. Yet by the end of April 2020, only 3 months after the first reported case of COVID-19 in the United States, nearly 1.3 million Medicare beneficiaries were utilizing telehealth services on a weekly basis.2 The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has recognized the vast increase in need and responded with the addition of 144 new telehealth services covered by Medicare in the last year. In December 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moved to make many of the previously provisional policies permanent, expanding long-term coverage for telehealth services,2 and use of teledermatology has expanded in parallel. Although the impetus for this change was simple necessity, the benefits of expanded teledermatology are likely to drive its continued incorporation into our daily practices.

Kevin Wright, MD, is a staff dermatologist at the Naval Medical Center San Diego (San Diego, California) and an Associate Professor of Dermatology at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (Bethesda, Maryland). In this interview, we discussed his experience incorporating a teledermatology component into his postresidency practice, the pros and cons of teledermatology practice, and ways that residents can prepare for a future in teledermatology.

Would you start by briefly describing your work model now?

My primary job is a Monday-through-Friday classic dermatology clinic job. On the weekends or days off, I see asynchronous and synchronous teledermatology through a specialized platform. On weekends, I tend to see anywhere between 20 and 40 patients in about a 6-hour period with breaks in between.

What does a typical “weekend” day of work look like?

In general, I’ll wake up early before my family and spend maybe an hour working. Oftentimes, that will be in my truck parked down by the beach, where I will go for a run or surf before logging on. If I have 40 visits scheduled that day, I can spend a few hours, message most of them, clarify some aspects of the visit, then go and have breakfast with my family before logging back on and completing the encounters.

Is most of your interaction with patients asynchronous, messaging back and forth to take history?

A few states require a phone call, so those are synchronous, and every Medicaid patient requires a video call. I do synchronous visits with all of my isotretinoin patients at first. It’s a mixed bag, but a lot of my visits are done entirely asynchronously.

What attracted you to this model?

During residency, I always felt that many of the ways we saw patients seemed extraordinarily inefficient. My best example of this is isotretinoin follow-ups. Before this year, most of my colleagues were uncomfortable with virtual isotretinoin follow-ups or thought it was a ridiculous idea. Frankly, I never shared this sentiment. Once I had my own board certification, I knew I was going to pursue teledermatology, because seeing kids take a half day off of school to come in for a 10-minute isotretinoin appointment (that’s mainly just a conversation about sports) just didn’t make sense to me. So I knew I wanted to pursue this idea, I just didn’t know exactly how. One day I was approached by a close friend and mentor of mine who had just purchased a teledermatology platform. She asked me if I would like to moonlight once I graduated and I jumped at the opportunity.

 

 

What steps did you take prior to graduating to help prepare you to practice teledermatology?

The most important thing I did—and the most important thing I think for third-year residents to do—is to set myself up for success by starting the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) licensure and certification process. Once you have a DEA number, you can apply for Medicare and Medicaid. The nice thing about Medicare is you can start billing immediately after you apply, which is important. The reimbursement isn’t as high, but they pay faster, which allows you to start seeing patients through teledermatology right away. In a pinch, you could see all Medicare patients and make a living until you’ve completed the rest of the process. Once you have a Medicare and Medicaid number, you can apply for credentialing through private payers. However, the Medicare process takes 3 months, and private-payers credentialing takes about 90 days as well. That’s a lot of time! Before finishing residency, I recommend you make sure you have an unrestricted DEA license and you apply for Medicare/Medicaid credentials. Then, when you’re looking at future employment, you can start getting state licenses almost immediately in whatever states you anticipate needing them.

What are the top 3 benefits of incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

Accessibility is one huge benefit. If you’re practicing in a rural area, you’re basically giving [patients] back their time. Teledermatology takes patients much less time, and they get the same level of care. That’s a big selling point. Your patients will be very happy and loyal because of that.

The other thing I never would have foreseen before starting teledermatology is the amazing follow-up you can get. I think many dermatology residents will agree that there are those patients where you think, “Wow, I wish I could see them back. I wonder how they did,” but you never see them again. That’s not the case with teledermatology. I have a running list of all my interesting cases, and I’ll just shoot them a message 2 or 4 weeks later and at their convenience, they can submit a quick photo. I get that excellent feedback, and that’s huge to me for my own personal education and growth.

The third would be experience. I have 24 state medical licenses, and I see patients of all varieties: all socioeconomic backgrounds and skin types and many with severe skin conditions never managed before by a specialist. That, frankly, has increased my comfort level for seeing patients of all types. It forces me to expand my utilization of certain therapies because some people can’t afford 95% of medications we prescribe commonly. I find that challenge very rewarding. It’s something I’m not sure you can achieve by just practicing within your bubble. Inevitably you are going to see a certain type of patient that your hospital or practice attracts by merit of its geography or catchment area. Teledermatology allows you to see the full spectrum of dermatology.

What are the biggest cons to incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

To start off, some patients have boundary issues. Every 200 patients or so, I’ll have someone who submits a visit at 11:30 pm, and then at 1:00 or 2:00 am they’re asking, “Why am I not being seen, what’s going on?” Maintaining patient boundaries becomes exponentially more difficult. In some respects, you are now expected to be available 24/7 because some people have unreasonable expectations. That is one of the most difficult aspects of practicing the way I do.

The second is reimbursement. In other practice models I can bill more in half the time by seeing a patient in person, doing a skin screening and a few biopsies. I believe there’s always a role for teledermatology in any practice, but ultimately dermatologists are pragmatic people who need to be smart about time management. At some point, it becomes difficult to pay the bills if reimbursement is lacking. That’s one of the bigger downsides to teledermatology. We still need to figure out how to reimburse to incentivize what’s best for the patient.

Could you talk more about the effect on work-life balance?

I think the things that make teledermatology appealing are the same things that could end up disrupting your work-life balance. On the positive side, you can vacation in Hawaii, work for 2 hours each morning, and pay for the whole thing. That’s very appealing to me! The downside is that there are always patients in the queue. In some sense, your waiting room is always half-full, 24/7. Mentally, you have to become comfortable with that, and you have to develop boundaries. I have very specific times I do teledermatology and then I log off. This helps me establish boundaries and creates balance.

You touched on it earlier regarding isotretinoin visits, but what other facets of practice do you think are particularly well-suited to teledermatology?

There are a few that I’ve incorporated into my practice quite aggressively. Almost all acne is going to go to a teledermatology visit. That’s in large part due to payer parity. For the most part, you make the same doing an acne visit online as you will doing it in person. Your patients will be getting the same level of care, better follow-up, and you’ll make the same amount of money. Another thing I do as a patient courtesy is wound checks postsurgery or post-Mohs [micrographic surgery]. There is a huge benefit there to seeing your patients because you can identify infections early, answer simple questions, and reduce in-person clinic visits. That’s a win.

What are visit types you feel are not well-suited to teledermatology or that you approach with more caution?

This will be different for everyone to some degree. I think practitioners need to be alert and use their best judgement when approaching any new patient or new concern. Pigmented lesions certainly give me pause. Although the technology is getting better every day, I believe there is still a gap between seeing a photo of a lesion and seeing a pigmented lesion in person, being able to get up close and examine it dermoscopically. Teledermoscopy, however, is an emerging business model as well, and it will be interesting to see what role this can play as it gets incorporated.

You mentioned having medical licenses in several states. Can you describe the process you went through to obtain these licenses?

It’s a painful process. I started realizing this was something I wanted to incorporate after residency, so I started looking into applying for medical licenses early. Teledermatology companies often will reimburse you and help you to get licenses. I was lucky enough to get assistance, which was essential because it is an onerous process. If you can work that into your contract during negotiations that would be ideal. Not everyone will be as lucky as I was, though. If that doesn’t pertain to you, pick a few states that have larger populations around you, where you know that they have a lot of need and start applying there. Be aware that medical licensure takes about 6 months. Having this started around mid–third year is important.

Employers want someone they can use right away, so I found it very beneficial to approach an employer and be able to explain to them tangibly where you are in the process. For example, “I’ve got my DEA license, Medicare, Medicaid number, and I have licensure in your state and all the surrounding states.” You then have a leg to stand on with your negotiating. If you do the legwork and can then negotiate a higher percentage, you’ll make up the licensure fees in a half day of work. It’s an investment toward your professional career.

Any final thoughts?

I think that insurers are very interested in teledermatology because there’s a potential for huge cost savings. As the dust settles with COVID-19 and we see how telemedicine has changed medicine in general, I really think that payers are going to be more aggressive about requiring teledermatology from their dermatologists. I think residents need to anticipate that teledermatology will be some part of their practice in the future and should start planning now to be prepared for this brave new world going forward.

References
  1. Yim KM, Florek AG, Oh DH, et al. Teledermatology in the United States: an update in a dynamic era. Telemed J E Health. 2018;24:691-697.
  2. Shatzkes MM, Borha EL. Permanent expansion of Medicare telehealth services. The National Law Review website. Published December 7, 2020. Accessed April 13, 2021. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/permanent-expansion-medicare-telehealth-services
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 107(4)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E37-E39
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego, California.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

The views expressed in this article reflect the results of research conducted by the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.

Correspondence: W. Hugh Lyford, MD, Naval Medical Center, Department of Dermatology, 34800 Bob Wilson Dr, San Diego, CA 92134 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

For the US health care system, the year 2020 was one of great change as well as extreme pain and hardship: some physical, but much emotional and financial. Dermatologists nationwide have not been sheltered from the winds of change. Yet as with most great challenges, one also can discern great change for the better if you look for it. One area of major growth in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is the expansion of telehealth, specifically teledermatology.

Prior to the pandemic, teledermatology was in a phase of modest expansion.1 Since the start of the pandemic, however, the adoption of telemedicine services in the United States has been beyond exponential. Before the pandemic, an estimated 15,000 Medicare recipients received telehealth services on a weekly basis. Yet by the end of April 2020, only 3 months after the first reported case of COVID-19 in the United States, nearly 1.3 million Medicare beneficiaries were utilizing telehealth services on a weekly basis.2 The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has recognized the vast increase in need and responded with the addition of 144 new telehealth services covered by Medicare in the last year. In December 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moved to make many of the previously provisional policies permanent, expanding long-term coverage for telehealth services,2 and use of teledermatology has expanded in parallel. Although the impetus for this change was simple necessity, the benefits of expanded teledermatology are likely to drive its continued incorporation into our daily practices.

Kevin Wright, MD, is a staff dermatologist at the Naval Medical Center San Diego (San Diego, California) and an Associate Professor of Dermatology at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (Bethesda, Maryland). In this interview, we discussed his experience incorporating a teledermatology component into his postresidency practice, the pros and cons of teledermatology practice, and ways that residents can prepare for a future in teledermatology.

Would you start by briefly describing your work model now?

My primary job is a Monday-through-Friday classic dermatology clinic job. On the weekends or days off, I see asynchronous and synchronous teledermatology through a specialized platform. On weekends, I tend to see anywhere between 20 and 40 patients in about a 6-hour period with breaks in between.

What does a typical “weekend” day of work look like?

In general, I’ll wake up early before my family and spend maybe an hour working. Oftentimes, that will be in my truck parked down by the beach, where I will go for a run or surf before logging on. If I have 40 visits scheduled that day, I can spend a few hours, message most of them, clarify some aspects of the visit, then go and have breakfast with my family before logging back on and completing the encounters.

Is most of your interaction with patients asynchronous, messaging back and forth to take history?

A few states require a phone call, so those are synchronous, and every Medicaid patient requires a video call. I do synchronous visits with all of my isotretinoin patients at first. It’s a mixed bag, but a lot of my visits are done entirely asynchronously.

What attracted you to this model?

During residency, I always felt that many of the ways we saw patients seemed extraordinarily inefficient. My best example of this is isotretinoin follow-ups. Before this year, most of my colleagues were uncomfortable with virtual isotretinoin follow-ups or thought it was a ridiculous idea. Frankly, I never shared this sentiment. Once I had my own board certification, I knew I was going to pursue teledermatology, because seeing kids take a half day off of school to come in for a 10-minute isotretinoin appointment (that’s mainly just a conversation about sports) just didn’t make sense to me. So I knew I wanted to pursue this idea, I just didn’t know exactly how. One day I was approached by a close friend and mentor of mine who had just purchased a teledermatology platform. She asked me if I would like to moonlight once I graduated and I jumped at the opportunity.

 

 

What steps did you take prior to graduating to help prepare you to practice teledermatology?

The most important thing I did—and the most important thing I think for third-year residents to do—is to set myself up for success by starting the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) licensure and certification process. Once you have a DEA number, you can apply for Medicare and Medicaid. The nice thing about Medicare is you can start billing immediately after you apply, which is important. The reimbursement isn’t as high, but they pay faster, which allows you to start seeing patients through teledermatology right away. In a pinch, you could see all Medicare patients and make a living until you’ve completed the rest of the process. Once you have a Medicare and Medicaid number, you can apply for credentialing through private payers. However, the Medicare process takes 3 months, and private-payers credentialing takes about 90 days as well. That’s a lot of time! Before finishing residency, I recommend you make sure you have an unrestricted DEA license and you apply for Medicare/Medicaid credentials. Then, when you’re looking at future employment, you can start getting state licenses almost immediately in whatever states you anticipate needing them.

What are the top 3 benefits of incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

Accessibility is one huge benefit. If you’re practicing in a rural area, you’re basically giving [patients] back their time. Teledermatology takes patients much less time, and they get the same level of care. That’s a big selling point. Your patients will be very happy and loyal because of that.

The other thing I never would have foreseen before starting teledermatology is the amazing follow-up you can get. I think many dermatology residents will agree that there are those patients where you think, “Wow, I wish I could see them back. I wonder how they did,” but you never see them again. That’s not the case with teledermatology. I have a running list of all my interesting cases, and I’ll just shoot them a message 2 or 4 weeks later and at their convenience, they can submit a quick photo. I get that excellent feedback, and that’s huge to me for my own personal education and growth.

The third would be experience. I have 24 state medical licenses, and I see patients of all varieties: all socioeconomic backgrounds and skin types and many with severe skin conditions never managed before by a specialist. That, frankly, has increased my comfort level for seeing patients of all types. It forces me to expand my utilization of certain therapies because some people can’t afford 95% of medications we prescribe commonly. I find that challenge very rewarding. It’s something I’m not sure you can achieve by just practicing within your bubble. Inevitably you are going to see a certain type of patient that your hospital or practice attracts by merit of its geography or catchment area. Teledermatology allows you to see the full spectrum of dermatology.

What are the biggest cons to incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

To start off, some patients have boundary issues. Every 200 patients or so, I’ll have someone who submits a visit at 11:30 pm, and then at 1:00 or 2:00 am they’re asking, “Why am I not being seen, what’s going on?” Maintaining patient boundaries becomes exponentially more difficult. In some respects, you are now expected to be available 24/7 because some people have unreasonable expectations. That is one of the most difficult aspects of practicing the way I do.

The second is reimbursement. In other practice models I can bill more in half the time by seeing a patient in person, doing a skin screening and a few biopsies. I believe there’s always a role for teledermatology in any practice, but ultimately dermatologists are pragmatic people who need to be smart about time management. At some point, it becomes difficult to pay the bills if reimbursement is lacking. That’s one of the bigger downsides to teledermatology. We still need to figure out how to reimburse to incentivize what’s best for the patient.

Could you talk more about the effect on work-life balance?

I think the things that make teledermatology appealing are the same things that could end up disrupting your work-life balance. On the positive side, you can vacation in Hawaii, work for 2 hours each morning, and pay for the whole thing. That’s very appealing to me! The downside is that there are always patients in the queue. In some sense, your waiting room is always half-full, 24/7. Mentally, you have to become comfortable with that, and you have to develop boundaries. I have very specific times I do teledermatology and then I log off. This helps me establish boundaries and creates balance.

You touched on it earlier regarding isotretinoin visits, but what other facets of practice do you think are particularly well-suited to teledermatology?

There are a few that I’ve incorporated into my practice quite aggressively. Almost all acne is going to go to a teledermatology visit. That’s in large part due to payer parity. For the most part, you make the same doing an acne visit online as you will doing it in person. Your patients will be getting the same level of care, better follow-up, and you’ll make the same amount of money. Another thing I do as a patient courtesy is wound checks postsurgery or post-Mohs [micrographic surgery]. There is a huge benefit there to seeing your patients because you can identify infections early, answer simple questions, and reduce in-person clinic visits. That’s a win.

What are visit types you feel are not well-suited to teledermatology or that you approach with more caution?

This will be different for everyone to some degree. I think practitioners need to be alert and use their best judgement when approaching any new patient or new concern. Pigmented lesions certainly give me pause. Although the technology is getting better every day, I believe there is still a gap between seeing a photo of a lesion and seeing a pigmented lesion in person, being able to get up close and examine it dermoscopically. Teledermoscopy, however, is an emerging business model as well, and it will be interesting to see what role this can play as it gets incorporated.

You mentioned having medical licenses in several states. Can you describe the process you went through to obtain these licenses?

It’s a painful process. I started realizing this was something I wanted to incorporate after residency, so I started looking into applying for medical licenses early. Teledermatology companies often will reimburse you and help you to get licenses. I was lucky enough to get assistance, which was essential because it is an onerous process. If you can work that into your contract during negotiations that would be ideal. Not everyone will be as lucky as I was, though. If that doesn’t pertain to you, pick a few states that have larger populations around you, where you know that they have a lot of need and start applying there. Be aware that medical licensure takes about 6 months. Having this started around mid–third year is important.

Employers want someone they can use right away, so I found it very beneficial to approach an employer and be able to explain to them tangibly where you are in the process. For example, “I’ve got my DEA license, Medicare, Medicaid number, and I have licensure in your state and all the surrounding states.” You then have a leg to stand on with your negotiating. If you do the legwork and can then negotiate a higher percentage, you’ll make up the licensure fees in a half day of work. It’s an investment toward your professional career.

Any final thoughts?

I think that insurers are very interested in teledermatology because there’s a potential for huge cost savings. As the dust settles with COVID-19 and we see how telemedicine has changed medicine in general, I really think that payers are going to be more aggressive about requiring teledermatology from their dermatologists. I think residents need to anticipate that teledermatology will be some part of their practice in the future and should start planning now to be prepared for this brave new world going forward.

For the US health care system, the year 2020 was one of great change as well as extreme pain and hardship: some physical, but much emotional and financial. Dermatologists nationwide have not been sheltered from the winds of change. Yet as with most great challenges, one also can discern great change for the better if you look for it. One area of major growth in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is the expansion of telehealth, specifically teledermatology.

Prior to the pandemic, teledermatology was in a phase of modest expansion.1 Since the start of the pandemic, however, the adoption of telemedicine services in the United States has been beyond exponential. Before the pandemic, an estimated 15,000 Medicare recipients received telehealth services on a weekly basis. Yet by the end of April 2020, only 3 months after the first reported case of COVID-19 in the United States, nearly 1.3 million Medicare beneficiaries were utilizing telehealth services on a weekly basis.2 The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has recognized the vast increase in need and responded with the addition of 144 new telehealth services covered by Medicare in the last year. In December 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services moved to make many of the previously provisional policies permanent, expanding long-term coverage for telehealth services,2 and use of teledermatology has expanded in parallel. Although the impetus for this change was simple necessity, the benefits of expanded teledermatology are likely to drive its continued incorporation into our daily practices.

Kevin Wright, MD, is a staff dermatologist at the Naval Medical Center San Diego (San Diego, California) and an Associate Professor of Dermatology at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (Bethesda, Maryland). In this interview, we discussed his experience incorporating a teledermatology component into his postresidency practice, the pros and cons of teledermatology practice, and ways that residents can prepare for a future in teledermatology.

Would you start by briefly describing your work model now?

My primary job is a Monday-through-Friday classic dermatology clinic job. On the weekends or days off, I see asynchronous and synchronous teledermatology through a specialized platform. On weekends, I tend to see anywhere between 20 and 40 patients in about a 6-hour period with breaks in between.

What does a typical “weekend” day of work look like?

In general, I’ll wake up early before my family and spend maybe an hour working. Oftentimes, that will be in my truck parked down by the beach, where I will go for a run or surf before logging on. If I have 40 visits scheduled that day, I can spend a few hours, message most of them, clarify some aspects of the visit, then go and have breakfast with my family before logging back on and completing the encounters.

Is most of your interaction with patients asynchronous, messaging back and forth to take history?

A few states require a phone call, so those are synchronous, and every Medicaid patient requires a video call. I do synchronous visits with all of my isotretinoin patients at first. It’s a mixed bag, but a lot of my visits are done entirely asynchronously.

What attracted you to this model?

During residency, I always felt that many of the ways we saw patients seemed extraordinarily inefficient. My best example of this is isotretinoin follow-ups. Before this year, most of my colleagues were uncomfortable with virtual isotretinoin follow-ups or thought it was a ridiculous idea. Frankly, I never shared this sentiment. Once I had my own board certification, I knew I was going to pursue teledermatology, because seeing kids take a half day off of school to come in for a 10-minute isotretinoin appointment (that’s mainly just a conversation about sports) just didn’t make sense to me. So I knew I wanted to pursue this idea, I just didn’t know exactly how. One day I was approached by a close friend and mentor of mine who had just purchased a teledermatology platform. She asked me if I would like to moonlight once I graduated and I jumped at the opportunity.

 

 

What steps did you take prior to graduating to help prepare you to practice teledermatology?

The most important thing I did—and the most important thing I think for third-year residents to do—is to set myself up for success by starting the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) licensure and certification process. Once you have a DEA number, you can apply for Medicare and Medicaid. The nice thing about Medicare is you can start billing immediately after you apply, which is important. The reimbursement isn’t as high, but they pay faster, which allows you to start seeing patients through teledermatology right away. In a pinch, you could see all Medicare patients and make a living until you’ve completed the rest of the process. Once you have a Medicare and Medicaid number, you can apply for credentialing through private payers. However, the Medicare process takes 3 months, and private-payers credentialing takes about 90 days as well. That’s a lot of time! Before finishing residency, I recommend you make sure you have an unrestricted DEA license and you apply for Medicare/Medicaid credentials. Then, when you’re looking at future employment, you can start getting state licenses almost immediately in whatever states you anticipate needing them.

What are the top 3 benefits of incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

Accessibility is one huge benefit. If you’re practicing in a rural area, you’re basically giving [patients] back their time. Teledermatology takes patients much less time, and they get the same level of care. That’s a big selling point. Your patients will be very happy and loyal because of that.

The other thing I never would have foreseen before starting teledermatology is the amazing follow-up you can get. I think many dermatology residents will agree that there are those patients where you think, “Wow, I wish I could see them back. I wonder how they did,” but you never see them again. That’s not the case with teledermatology. I have a running list of all my interesting cases, and I’ll just shoot them a message 2 or 4 weeks later and at their convenience, they can submit a quick photo. I get that excellent feedback, and that’s huge to me for my own personal education and growth.

The third would be experience. I have 24 state medical licenses, and I see patients of all varieties: all socioeconomic backgrounds and skin types and many with severe skin conditions never managed before by a specialist. That, frankly, has increased my comfort level for seeing patients of all types. It forces me to expand my utilization of certain therapies because some people can’t afford 95% of medications we prescribe commonly. I find that challenge very rewarding. It’s something I’m not sure you can achieve by just practicing within your bubble. Inevitably you are going to see a certain type of patient that your hospital or practice attracts by merit of its geography or catchment area. Teledermatology allows you to see the full spectrum of dermatology.

What are the biggest cons to incorporating teledermatology into your practice?

To start off, some patients have boundary issues. Every 200 patients or so, I’ll have someone who submits a visit at 11:30 pm, and then at 1:00 or 2:00 am they’re asking, “Why am I not being seen, what’s going on?” Maintaining patient boundaries becomes exponentially more difficult. In some respects, you are now expected to be available 24/7 because some people have unreasonable expectations. That is one of the most difficult aspects of practicing the way I do.

The second is reimbursement. In other practice models I can bill more in half the time by seeing a patient in person, doing a skin screening and a few biopsies. I believe there’s always a role for teledermatology in any practice, but ultimately dermatologists are pragmatic people who need to be smart about time management. At some point, it becomes difficult to pay the bills if reimbursement is lacking. That’s one of the bigger downsides to teledermatology. We still need to figure out how to reimburse to incentivize what’s best for the patient.

Could you talk more about the effect on work-life balance?

I think the things that make teledermatology appealing are the same things that could end up disrupting your work-life balance. On the positive side, you can vacation in Hawaii, work for 2 hours each morning, and pay for the whole thing. That’s very appealing to me! The downside is that there are always patients in the queue. In some sense, your waiting room is always half-full, 24/7. Mentally, you have to become comfortable with that, and you have to develop boundaries. I have very specific times I do teledermatology and then I log off. This helps me establish boundaries and creates balance.

You touched on it earlier regarding isotretinoin visits, but what other facets of practice do you think are particularly well-suited to teledermatology?

There are a few that I’ve incorporated into my practice quite aggressively. Almost all acne is going to go to a teledermatology visit. That’s in large part due to payer parity. For the most part, you make the same doing an acne visit online as you will doing it in person. Your patients will be getting the same level of care, better follow-up, and you’ll make the same amount of money. Another thing I do as a patient courtesy is wound checks postsurgery or post-Mohs [micrographic surgery]. There is a huge benefit there to seeing your patients because you can identify infections early, answer simple questions, and reduce in-person clinic visits. That’s a win.

What are visit types you feel are not well-suited to teledermatology or that you approach with more caution?

This will be different for everyone to some degree. I think practitioners need to be alert and use their best judgement when approaching any new patient or new concern. Pigmented lesions certainly give me pause. Although the technology is getting better every day, I believe there is still a gap between seeing a photo of a lesion and seeing a pigmented lesion in person, being able to get up close and examine it dermoscopically. Teledermoscopy, however, is an emerging business model as well, and it will be interesting to see what role this can play as it gets incorporated.

You mentioned having medical licenses in several states. Can you describe the process you went through to obtain these licenses?

It’s a painful process. I started realizing this was something I wanted to incorporate after residency, so I started looking into applying for medical licenses early. Teledermatology companies often will reimburse you and help you to get licenses. I was lucky enough to get assistance, which was essential because it is an onerous process. If you can work that into your contract during negotiations that would be ideal. Not everyone will be as lucky as I was, though. If that doesn’t pertain to you, pick a few states that have larger populations around you, where you know that they have a lot of need and start applying there. Be aware that medical licensure takes about 6 months. Having this started around mid–third year is important.

Employers want someone they can use right away, so I found it very beneficial to approach an employer and be able to explain to them tangibly where you are in the process. For example, “I’ve got my DEA license, Medicare, Medicaid number, and I have licensure in your state and all the surrounding states.” You then have a leg to stand on with your negotiating. If you do the legwork and can then negotiate a higher percentage, you’ll make up the licensure fees in a half day of work. It’s an investment toward your professional career.

Any final thoughts?

I think that insurers are very interested in teledermatology because there’s a potential for huge cost savings. As the dust settles with COVID-19 and we see how telemedicine has changed medicine in general, I really think that payers are going to be more aggressive about requiring teledermatology from their dermatologists. I think residents need to anticipate that teledermatology will be some part of their practice in the future and should start planning now to be prepared for this brave new world going forward.

References
  1. Yim KM, Florek AG, Oh DH, et al. Teledermatology in the United States: an update in a dynamic era. Telemed J E Health. 2018;24:691-697.
  2. Shatzkes MM, Borha EL. Permanent expansion of Medicare telehealth services. The National Law Review website. Published December 7, 2020. Accessed April 13, 2021. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/permanent-expansion-medicare-telehealth-services
References
  1. Yim KM, Florek AG, Oh DH, et al. Teledermatology in the United States: an update in a dynamic era. Telemed J E Health. 2018;24:691-697.
  2. Shatzkes MM, Borha EL. Permanent expansion of Medicare telehealth services. The National Law Review website. Published December 7, 2020. Accessed April 13, 2021. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/permanent-expansion-medicare-telehealth-services
Issue
cutis - 107(4)
Issue
cutis - 107(4)
Page Number
E37-E39
Page Number
E37-E39
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • One result of the COVID-19 pandemic is the aggressive adoption of teledermatology across the United States. Graduating residents should be preparing for a scope of practice that incorporates teledermatology.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
Article PDF Media

Empowering Residents to Address Socioeconomic Disparities in Dermatology

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 04/13/2021 - 12:13

Studding almost every inch of skin except the face are gray lichenified plaques coating a patient’s body like worn leather. Raking his nails across his arm, the patient reminds me how long he had waited to receive this referral and how early he had awoken for this appointment. He was well acquainted with the value of promptness; in his world, it might make the difference between sleeping on a cot and a night spent on concrete.

Over the last year, the patient had cycled through the few safety-net clinics scattered throughout the city. He had accumulated numerous different diagnoses from atopic dermatitis to disseminated tinea corporis. A few minutes, one #15 scalpel, and mineral oil were all it took for us to unravel the mystery. As the attending and I peered through the microscope at the scabies ovum, I couldn’t help but wonder about the alternative outcomes to his case. Left untreated, scabies compromises the skin barrier, paving the way for secondary infections such as cellulitis. Depending on the pathogen, this infection may in turn evolve into acute postinfectious glomerulonephritis.1-4 An elusive diagnosis can quietly escalate into considerable morbidity for patients. This case highlights the dire consequences of dermatologic health disparities and places medicine’s primordial function into sharp focus: the alleviation of suffering.

The Dermatologic Burden of Disease

As a major contributor to global disease burden, dermatologic disease is the fourth greatest cause of disability worldwide when mortality is factored out.5,6 Among global rural populations, dermatologic disease constitutes one of the leading causes of death and/or loss of professional capabilities.7 In the United States alone, nearly 27% of the population saw a physician for at least 1 dermatologic disease in 2013.5 The tremendous prevalence of skin disease magnifies discrepancies in access to dermatologic care, which has been observed to be influenced by age, socioeconomic background, rurality, and sex.8

There has been growing focus on the national shortage of dermatologists over the last 2 decades.9,10 With an aging population and rising incidence of skin cancer, this undersupply is projected to increase and disproportionately impact ethnic minorities as well as those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.8,9,11-14 These trends are of particular importance to residents and medical trainees. Multiple studies have demonstrated that the patient demographic of hospital-based resident clinics includes primarily minority and disenfranchised populations with poorer overall health.15-17 In contrast to faculty clinics, residents treat patients who are more likely to be nonwhite and more likely to be reimbursed by Medicaid.18 The unique demographic makeup of hospital-based resident clinics raises questions about the preparedness and comfort of resident physicians in managing the nuances of health care delivery in these settings.10

Providing equitable care to marginalized populations within the constraints of 15- to 30-minute visits can be challenging to physicians and trainees. Even clinicians with the best of intentions may be impeded by a lack of familiarity with the daily realities of impoverished living conditions, implicit prejudice against people living in poverty, and adapting recommendations to varying levels of health literacy among patients.19,20 Contending with these daunting obstacles can be discouraging. Given how entrenched certain institutional barriers are, questioning them may seem an exercise in futility, yet history demonstrates that residents can and have been empowered to improve tangible outcomes for vulnerable populations. In reflecting on approaches of the general medical education system, The Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation President George E. Thibault, MD, observed that, “When appropriately trained, deployed and incented, [residents] can help achieve institutional goals to improve quality, safety and efficiency.”21

Start Small But Dream Big

Action begins with awareness. Medical school and teaching hospital curricula are increasingly integrating educational exercises regarding the social determinants of health and populations with unmet needs. Medical training presents an exclusive opportunity to gain exposure to and familiarity with patient populations that one might not otherwise encounter. Immersion programs provide invaluable experience in tailoring health care delivery to the needs of vulnerable communities. Although opportunities for international rotations abound, domestic rotations among underserved populations can be just as transformative, including correctional medicine, homeless clinics, the Indian Health Service, and rural communities.

Create Partnerships to Broaden Impact of Service

Affecting the largest and most visible organ, skin disease often presents a substantial concern for patients and can herald systemic disease. The nature of dermatologic disease engenders close collaboration between general practitioners and specialists. For example, while resident-run or safety-net clinics characteristically center on providing holistic care for patients through internal medicine or primary care, these overworked and understaffed clinics often are in need of evaluation by specialists for specific concerns. Some clinic models feature dermatology faculty who volunteer routinely (ie, every 2 weeks, every month) to examine all the clinic’s patients presenting with concerns pertinent to the specialty. Drawing on their respective areas of expertise, general practitioners and dermatologists therefore can collaborate to connect disadvantaged patients with the specialized care they need.

Challenges Present Opportunities for Innovation

Adhering to the social distancing requirements of the COVID-19 pandemic protocol has driven clinicians to utilize innovative approaches to patient care. The rural-urban misdistribution of the dermatologist workforce has long been established, with rural patients often experiencing lengthy wait times to see a specialist.9 Both synchronous and asynchronous teledermatology modalities provide an ideal platform for triaging patients with dermatologic concerns who otherwise have meager access to a dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

Residency training is a prime opportunity to gain exposure to the broad spectrum of disease within dermatology as well as the diverse range of affected patients. Drawing on the aforementioned strategies, residents can leverage this knowledge in the service of underserved patients.

References
  1. McCarthy JS, Kemp DJ, Walton SF, et al. Scabies: more than just an irritation. Postgrad Med J. 2004;80:382-387.
  2. Svartman M, Finklea JF, Earle DP, et al. Epidemic scabies and acute glomerulonephritis in Trinidad. Lancet. 1972;1:249-251.
  3. Hersch C. Acute glomerulonephritis due to skin disease, with special reference to scabies. S Afr Med J. 1967;41:29-34.
  4. Carapetis JR, Connors C, Yarmirr D, et al. Success of a scabies control program in an Australian aboriginal community. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1997;16:494-499.
  5. Lim HW, Collins SAB, Resneck JS Jr, et al. The burden of skin disease in the United States [published online March 1, 2017]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:958-972.e2.
  6. Karimkhani C, Dellavalle RP, Coffeng LE, et al. Global skin disease morbidity and mortality: an update from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:406-412.
  7. Morrone A. Poverty, dignity, and forgotten skin care: dermatology in the stream of human mobile population. Dermatol Clin. 2008;26:245-256, vi-vii.
  8. Tripathi R, Knusel KD, Ezaldein HH, et al. Association of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics with differences in use of outpatient dermatology services in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1286-1291.
  9. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  10. Blanco G, Vasquez R, Nezafati K, et al. How residency programs can foster practice for the underserved. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:158-159.
  11. Kosmadaki MG, Gilchrest BA. The demographics of aging in the United States: implications for dermatology. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138:1427-1428.
  12. Donaldson MR, Coldiron BM. No end in sight: the skin cancer epidemic continues. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2011;30:3-5.
  13. Dall TM, Gallo PD, Chakrabarti R, et al. An aging population and growing disease burden will require a large and specialized health care workforce by 2025. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:2013-2020.
  14. Sauaia A, Dellavalle RP. Health care inequities: an introduction for dermatology providers. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:103-107.
  15. Brook RH, Fink A, Kosecoff J, et al. Educating physicians and treating patients in the ambulatory setting. where are we going and how will we know when we arrive? Ann Intern Med. 1987;107:392-398.
  16. Yancy WS Jr, Macpherson DS, Hanusa BH, et al. Patient satisfaction in resident and attending ambulatory care clinics. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:755-762. 17. Fiebach NH,
  17. Wong JG. Taking care of patients in resident clinics: where do we stand? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:787-789.
  18. Loignon C, Boudreault-Fournier A, Truchon K, et al. Medical residents reflect on their prejudices toward poverty: a photovoice training project. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:1050.
  19. Scheid D, Logue E, Gilchrist VJ, et al. Do we practice what we preach? comparing the patients of faculty and residents. Fam Med. 1995;27:519-524.
  20. Loignon C, Gottin T, Dupéré S, et al. General practitioners’ perspective on poverty: a qualitative study in Montreal, Canada. Fam Pract. 2018;35:105-110.
  21. Parks T. Empowered residents can help transform medical care. American Medical Association website. Published November 30, 2016. Accessed March 18, 2021. www.ama-assn.org/education/improve-gme/empowered-residents-can-help-transform-medical-care
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, Florida.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Soraya Azzawi, MD ([email protected]).

Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E43-E45
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, Florida.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Soraya Azzawi, MD ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, Florida.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Soraya Azzawi, MD ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

Studding almost every inch of skin except the face are gray lichenified plaques coating a patient’s body like worn leather. Raking his nails across his arm, the patient reminds me how long he had waited to receive this referral and how early he had awoken for this appointment. He was well acquainted with the value of promptness; in his world, it might make the difference between sleeping on a cot and a night spent on concrete.

Over the last year, the patient had cycled through the few safety-net clinics scattered throughout the city. He had accumulated numerous different diagnoses from atopic dermatitis to disseminated tinea corporis. A few minutes, one #15 scalpel, and mineral oil were all it took for us to unravel the mystery. As the attending and I peered through the microscope at the scabies ovum, I couldn’t help but wonder about the alternative outcomes to his case. Left untreated, scabies compromises the skin barrier, paving the way for secondary infections such as cellulitis. Depending on the pathogen, this infection may in turn evolve into acute postinfectious glomerulonephritis.1-4 An elusive diagnosis can quietly escalate into considerable morbidity for patients. This case highlights the dire consequences of dermatologic health disparities and places medicine’s primordial function into sharp focus: the alleviation of suffering.

The Dermatologic Burden of Disease

As a major contributor to global disease burden, dermatologic disease is the fourth greatest cause of disability worldwide when mortality is factored out.5,6 Among global rural populations, dermatologic disease constitutes one of the leading causes of death and/or loss of professional capabilities.7 In the United States alone, nearly 27% of the population saw a physician for at least 1 dermatologic disease in 2013.5 The tremendous prevalence of skin disease magnifies discrepancies in access to dermatologic care, which has been observed to be influenced by age, socioeconomic background, rurality, and sex.8

There has been growing focus on the national shortage of dermatologists over the last 2 decades.9,10 With an aging population and rising incidence of skin cancer, this undersupply is projected to increase and disproportionately impact ethnic minorities as well as those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.8,9,11-14 These trends are of particular importance to residents and medical trainees. Multiple studies have demonstrated that the patient demographic of hospital-based resident clinics includes primarily minority and disenfranchised populations with poorer overall health.15-17 In contrast to faculty clinics, residents treat patients who are more likely to be nonwhite and more likely to be reimbursed by Medicaid.18 The unique demographic makeup of hospital-based resident clinics raises questions about the preparedness and comfort of resident physicians in managing the nuances of health care delivery in these settings.10

Providing equitable care to marginalized populations within the constraints of 15- to 30-minute visits can be challenging to physicians and trainees. Even clinicians with the best of intentions may be impeded by a lack of familiarity with the daily realities of impoverished living conditions, implicit prejudice against people living in poverty, and adapting recommendations to varying levels of health literacy among patients.19,20 Contending with these daunting obstacles can be discouraging. Given how entrenched certain institutional barriers are, questioning them may seem an exercise in futility, yet history demonstrates that residents can and have been empowered to improve tangible outcomes for vulnerable populations. In reflecting on approaches of the general medical education system, The Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation President George E. Thibault, MD, observed that, “When appropriately trained, deployed and incented, [residents] can help achieve institutional goals to improve quality, safety and efficiency.”21

Start Small But Dream Big

Action begins with awareness. Medical school and teaching hospital curricula are increasingly integrating educational exercises regarding the social determinants of health and populations with unmet needs. Medical training presents an exclusive opportunity to gain exposure to and familiarity with patient populations that one might not otherwise encounter. Immersion programs provide invaluable experience in tailoring health care delivery to the needs of vulnerable communities. Although opportunities for international rotations abound, domestic rotations among underserved populations can be just as transformative, including correctional medicine, homeless clinics, the Indian Health Service, and rural communities.

Create Partnerships to Broaden Impact of Service

Affecting the largest and most visible organ, skin disease often presents a substantial concern for patients and can herald systemic disease. The nature of dermatologic disease engenders close collaboration between general practitioners and specialists. For example, while resident-run or safety-net clinics characteristically center on providing holistic care for patients through internal medicine or primary care, these overworked and understaffed clinics often are in need of evaluation by specialists for specific concerns. Some clinic models feature dermatology faculty who volunteer routinely (ie, every 2 weeks, every month) to examine all the clinic’s patients presenting with concerns pertinent to the specialty. Drawing on their respective areas of expertise, general practitioners and dermatologists therefore can collaborate to connect disadvantaged patients with the specialized care they need.

Challenges Present Opportunities for Innovation

Adhering to the social distancing requirements of the COVID-19 pandemic protocol has driven clinicians to utilize innovative approaches to patient care. The rural-urban misdistribution of the dermatologist workforce has long been established, with rural patients often experiencing lengthy wait times to see a specialist.9 Both synchronous and asynchronous teledermatology modalities provide an ideal platform for triaging patients with dermatologic concerns who otherwise have meager access to a dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

Residency training is a prime opportunity to gain exposure to the broad spectrum of disease within dermatology as well as the diverse range of affected patients. Drawing on the aforementioned strategies, residents can leverage this knowledge in the service of underserved patients.

Studding almost every inch of skin except the face are gray lichenified plaques coating a patient’s body like worn leather. Raking his nails across his arm, the patient reminds me how long he had waited to receive this referral and how early he had awoken for this appointment. He was well acquainted with the value of promptness; in his world, it might make the difference between sleeping on a cot and a night spent on concrete.

Over the last year, the patient had cycled through the few safety-net clinics scattered throughout the city. He had accumulated numerous different diagnoses from atopic dermatitis to disseminated tinea corporis. A few minutes, one #15 scalpel, and mineral oil were all it took for us to unravel the mystery. As the attending and I peered through the microscope at the scabies ovum, I couldn’t help but wonder about the alternative outcomes to his case. Left untreated, scabies compromises the skin barrier, paving the way for secondary infections such as cellulitis. Depending on the pathogen, this infection may in turn evolve into acute postinfectious glomerulonephritis.1-4 An elusive diagnosis can quietly escalate into considerable morbidity for patients. This case highlights the dire consequences of dermatologic health disparities and places medicine’s primordial function into sharp focus: the alleviation of suffering.

The Dermatologic Burden of Disease

As a major contributor to global disease burden, dermatologic disease is the fourth greatest cause of disability worldwide when mortality is factored out.5,6 Among global rural populations, dermatologic disease constitutes one of the leading causes of death and/or loss of professional capabilities.7 In the United States alone, nearly 27% of the population saw a physician for at least 1 dermatologic disease in 2013.5 The tremendous prevalence of skin disease magnifies discrepancies in access to dermatologic care, which has been observed to be influenced by age, socioeconomic background, rurality, and sex.8

There has been growing focus on the national shortage of dermatologists over the last 2 decades.9,10 With an aging population and rising incidence of skin cancer, this undersupply is projected to increase and disproportionately impact ethnic minorities as well as those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.8,9,11-14 These trends are of particular importance to residents and medical trainees. Multiple studies have demonstrated that the patient demographic of hospital-based resident clinics includes primarily minority and disenfranchised populations with poorer overall health.15-17 In contrast to faculty clinics, residents treat patients who are more likely to be nonwhite and more likely to be reimbursed by Medicaid.18 The unique demographic makeup of hospital-based resident clinics raises questions about the preparedness and comfort of resident physicians in managing the nuances of health care delivery in these settings.10

Providing equitable care to marginalized populations within the constraints of 15- to 30-minute visits can be challenging to physicians and trainees. Even clinicians with the best of intentions may be impeded by a lack of familiarity with the daily realities of impoverished living conditions, implicit prejudice against people living in poverty, and adapting recommendations to varying levels of health literacy among patients.19,20 Contending with these daunting obstacles can be discouraging. Given how entrenched certain institutional barriers are, questioning them may seem an exercise in futility, yet history demonstrates that residents can and have been empowered to improve tangible outcomes for vulnerable populations. In reflecting on approaches of the general medical education system, The Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation President George E. Thibault, MD, observed that, “When appropriately trained, deployed and incented, [residents] can help achieve institutional goals to improve quality, safety and efficiency.”21

Start Small But Dream Big

Action begins with awareness. Medical school and teaching hospital curricula are increasingly integrating educational exercises regarding the social determinants of health and populations with unmet needs. Medical training presents an exclusive opportunity to gain exposure to and familiarity with patient populations that one might not otherwise encounter. Immersion programs provide invaluable experience in tailoring health care delivery to the needs of vulnerable communities. Although opportunities for international rotations abound, domestic rotations among underserved populations can be just as transformative, including correctional medicine, homeless clinics, the Indian Health Service, and rural communities.

Create Partnerships to Broaden Impact of Service

Affecting the largest and most visible organ, skin disease often presents a substantial concern for patients and can herald systemic disease. The nature of dermatologic disease engenders close collaboration between general practitioners and specialists. For example, while resident-run or safety-net clinics characteristically center on providing holistic care for patients through internal medicine or primary care, these overworked and understaffed clinics often are in need of evaluation by specialists for specific concerns. Some clinic models feature dermatology faculty who volunteer routinely (ie, every 2 weeks, every month) to examine all the clinic’s patients presenting with concerns pertinent to the specialty. Drawing on their respective areas of expertise, general practitioners and dermatologists therefore can collaborate to connect disadvantaged patients with the specialized care they need.

Challenges Present Opportunities for Innovation

Adhering to the social distancing requirements of the COVID-19 pandemic protocol has driven clinicians to utilize innovative approaches to patient care. The rural-urban misdistribution of the dermatologist workforce has long been established, with rural patients often experiencing lengthy wait times to see a specialist.9 Both synchronous and asynchronous teledermatology modalities provide an ideal platform for triaging patients with dermatologic concerns who otherwise have meager access to a dermatologist.

Final Thoughts

Residency training is a prime opportunity to gain exposure to the broad spectrum of disease within dermatology as well as the diverse range of affected patients. Drawing on the aforementioned strategies, residents can leverage this knowledge in the service of underserved patients.

References
  1. McCarthy JS, Kemp DJ, Walton SF, et al. Scabies: more than just an irritation. Postgrad Med J. 2004;80:382-387.
  2. Svartman M, Finklea JF, Earle DP, et al. Epidemic scabies and acute glomerulonephritis in Trinidad. Lancet. 1972;1:249-251.
  3. Hersch C. Acute glomerulonephritis due to skin disease, with special reference to scabies. S Afr Med J. 1967;41:29-34.
  4. Carapetis JR, Connors C, Yarmirr D, et al. Success of a scabies control program in an Australian aboriginal community. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1997;16:494-499.
  5. Lim HW, Collins SAB, Resneck JS Jr, et al. The burden of skin disease in the United States [published online March 1, 2017]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:958-972.e2.
  6. Karimkhani C, Dellavalle RP, Coffeng LE, et al. Global skin disease morbidity and mortality: an update from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:406-412.
  7. Morrone A. Poverty, dignity, and forgotten skin care: dermatology in the stream of human mobile population. Dermatol Clin. 2008;26:245-256, vi-vii.
  8. Tripathi R, Knusel KD, Ezaldein HH, et al. Association of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics with differences in use of outpatient dermatology services in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1286-1291.
  9. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  10. Blanco G, Vasquez R, Nezafati K, et al. How residency programs can foster practice for the underserved. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:158-159.
  11. Kosmadaki MG, Gilchrest BA. The demographics of aging in the United States: implications for dermatology. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138:1427-1428.
  12. Donaldson MR, Coldiron BM. No end in sight: the skin cancer epidemic continues. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2011;30:3-5.
  13. Dall TM, Gallo PD, Chakrabarti R, et al. An aging population and growing disease burden will require a large and specialized health care workforce by 2025. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:2013-2020.
  14. Sauaia A, Dellavalle RP. Health care inequities: an introduction for dermatology providers. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:103-107.
  15. Brook RH, Fink A, Kosecoff J, et al. Educating physicians and treating patients in the ambulatory setting. where are we going and how will we know when we arrive? Ann Intern Med. 1987;107:392-398.
  16. Yancy WS Jr, Macpherson DS, Hanusa BH, et al. Patient satisfaction in resident and attending ambulatory care clinics. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:755-762. 17. Fiebach NH,
  17. Wong JG. Taking care of patients in resident clinics: where do we stand? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:787-789.
  18. Loignon C, Boudreault-Fournier A, Truchon K, et al. Medical residents reflect on their prejudices toward poverty: a photovoice training project. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:1050.
  19. Scheid D, Logue E, Gilchrist VJ, et al. Do we practice what we preach? comparing the patients of faculty and residents. Fam Med. 1995;27:519-524.
  20. Loignon C, Gottin T, Dupéré S, et al. General practitioners’ perspective on poverty: a qualitative study in Montreal, Canada. Fam Pract. 2018;35:105-110.
  21. Parks T. Empowered residents can help transform medical care. American Medical Association website. Published November 30, 2016. Accessed March 18, 2021. www.ama-assn.org/education/improve-gme/empowered-residents-can-help-transform-medical-care
References
  1. McCarthy JS, Kemp DJ, Walton SF, et al. Scabies: more than just an irritation. Postgrad Med J. 2004;80:382-387.
  2. Svartman M, Finklea JF, Earle DP, et al. Epidemic scabies and acute glomerulonephritis in Trinidad. Lancet. 1972;1:249-251.
  3. Hersch C. Acute glomerulonephritis due to skin disease, with special reference to scabies. S Afr Med J. 1967;41:29-34.
  4. Carapetis JR, Connors C, Yarmirr D, et al. Success of a scabies control program in an Australian aboriginal community. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1997;16:494-499.
  5. Lim HW, Collins SAB, Resneck JS Jr, et al. The burden of skin disease in the United States [published online March 1, 2017]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:958-972.e2.
  6. Karimkhani C, Dellavalle RP, Coffeng LE, et al. Global skin disease morbidity and mortality: an update from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:406-412.
  7. Morrone A. Poverty, dignity, and forgotten skin care: dermatology in the stream of human mobile population. Dermatol Clin. 2008;26:245-256, vi-vii.
  8. Tripathi R, Knusel KD, Ezaldein HH, et al. Association of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics with differences in use of outpatient dermatology services in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1286-1291.
  9. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  10. Blanco G, Vasquez R, Nezafati K, et al. How residency programs can foster practice for the underserved. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;67:158-159.
  11. Kosmadaki MG, Gilchrest BA. The demographics of aging in the United States: implications for dermatology. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138:1427-1428.
  12. Donaldson MR, Coldiron BM. No end in sight: the skin cancer epidemic continues. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2011;30:3-5.
  13. Dall TM, Gallo PD, Chakrabarti R, et al. An aging population and growing disease burden will require a large and specialized health care workforce by 2025. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:2013-2020.
  14. Sauaia A, Dellavalle RP. Health care inequities: an introduction for dermatology providers. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:103-107.
  15. Brook RH, Fink A, Kosecoff J, et al. Educating physicians and treating patients in the ambulatory setting. where are we going and how will we know when we arrive? Ann Intern Med. 1987;107:392-398.
  16. Yancy WS Jr, Macpherson DS, Hanusa BH, et al. Patient satisfaction in resident and attending ambulatory care clinics. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:755-762. 17. Fiebach NH,
  17. Wong JG. Taking care of patients in resident clinics: where do we stand? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:787-789.
  18. Loignon C, Boudreault-Fournier A, Truchon K, et al. Medical residents reflect on their prejudices toward poverty: a photovoice training project. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:1050.
  19. Scheid D, Logue E, Gilchrist VJ, et al. Do we practice what we preach? comparing the patients of faculty and residents. Fam Med. 1995;27:519-524.
  20. Loignon C, Gottin T, Dupéré S, et al. General practitioners’ perspective on poverty: a qualitative study in Montreal, Canada. Fam Pract. 2018;35:105-110.
  21. Parks T. Empowered residents can help transform medical care. American Medical Association website. Published November 30, 2016. Accessed March 18, 2021. www.ama-assn.org/education/improve-gme/empowered-residents-can-help-transform-medical-care
Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Issue
cutis - 107(3)
Page Number
E43-E45
Page Number
E43-E45
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Even while in training, dermatology residents have the agency to impact their communities by connecting their expertise to the patients in greatest need.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
Article PDF Media

The Genital Examination in Dermatologic Practice

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 03/03/2021 - 14:50

A casual survey of my dermatology co-residents yielded overwhelmingly unanimous results: A complete skin check goes from head to toe but does not routinely include an examination of the genital area. This observation contrasts starkly with the American Academy of Dermatology’s Basic Dermatology Curriculum, which recommends inspection of the entire skin surface including the mucous membranes (ie, eyes, mouth, anus, genital area) as part of the total-body skin examination (TBSE).1 It even draws attention to so-called hidden areas where lesions easily can be missed, such as the perianal skin. My observation seems far from anecdotal; even a recent attempt at optimizing movements in the TBSE neglected to include examination of the genitalia in the proposed method,2-4 and many practicing dermatologists seem to agree. A survey of international dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics found male and female genitalia were the least frequently examined anatomy sites during the TBSE. Additionally, female genitalia were examined less frequently than male genitalia (labia majora, 28%; penis, 52%; P=.003).5 Another survey of US academic dermatologists (23 dermatologists, 1 nurse practitioner) found that only 4% always visually inspected the vulva during routine annual examinations, and 50% did not think that vulvar examination was the dermatologist’s responsibility.6 Similar findings were reported in a survey of US dermatology residents.7

Why is the genital area routinely omitted from the dermatologic TBSE? Based on the surveys of dermatologists and dermatology residents, the most common reason cited for not examining these sites was patient discomfort, but there also was a dominant belief that other specialties, such as gynecologists, urologists, or primary care providers, routinely examine these areas.5,7 Time constraints also were a concern.

Although examination of sensitive areas can be uncomfortable,8 most patients still expect these locations to be examined during the TBSE. In a survey of 500 adults presenting for TBSE at an academic dermatology clinic, 84% of respondents expected the dermatologist to examine the genital area.9 Similarly, another survey of patient preferences (N=443) for the TBSE found that only 31.3% of women and 12.5% of men preferred not to have their genital area examined.10 As providers, we may be uncomfortable examining the genital area; however, our patients mostly expect it as part of routine practice. There are a number of barriers that may prevent incorporating the genital examination into daily dermatologic practice.

Training in Genital Examinations

Adequate training may be an issue for provider comfort when examining the genital skin. In a survey of dermatology residency program directors (n=38) and residents (n=91), 61.7% reported receiving formal instruction on TBSE technique and 38.3% reported being self-taught. Examination of the genital skin was included only 40% of the time.11 Even vulvar disorder experts have admitted to receiving their training by self-teaching, with only 19% receiving vulvar training during residency and 11% during fellowship.12 Improving this training appears to be an ongoing effort.2

Passing the Buck

It may be easier to think that another provider is routinely examining genital skin based on the relative absence of this area in dermatologic training; however, that does not appear to be the case. In a 1999 survey of primary care providers, only 31% reported performing skin cancer screenings on their adult patients, citing lack of confidence in this clinical skill as the biggest hurdle.13 Similarly, changes in recommendations for the utility of the screening pelvic examination in asymptomatic, average-risk, nonpregnant adult women have decreased the performance of this examination in actual practice.14 Reviews of resident training in vulvovaginal disease also have shown that although dermatology residents receive slightly less formal training hours on vulvar skin disease, they see more than double the number of patients with vulvar disease per year when compared to obstetrics and gynecology residents.15 In practice, dermatologists generally are more confident when evaluating vulvar pigmented lesions than gynecologists.6

The Importance of the Genital Examination

Looking past these barriers seems essential to providing the best dermatologic care, as there are a multitude of neoplastic and inflammatory dermatoses that can affect the genital skin. Furthermore, early diagnosis and treatment of these conditions potentially can limit morbidity and mortality as well as improve quality of life. Genital melanomas are a good example. Although they may be rare, it is well known that genital melanomas are associated with an aggressive disease course and have worse outcomes than melanomas found elsewhere on the body.16,17 Increasing rates of genital and perianal keratinocyte carcinomas make including this as part of the TBSE even more important.18

We also should not forget that inflammatory conditions can routinely involve the genitals.19-21 Although robust data are lacking, chronic vulvar concerns frequently are seen in the primary care setting. In one study in the United Kingdom, 52% of general practitioners surveyed saw more than 3 patients per month with vulvar concerns.22 Even in common dermatologic conditions such as psoriasis and lichen planus, genital involvement often is overlooked despite its relative frequency.23-27 In one study, 60% of psoriasis patients with genital involvement had not had these lesions examined by a physician.28

 

 



Theoretically, TBSEs that include genital examination would yield higher and earlier detection rates of neoplasms as well as inflammatory dermatoses.29-32 Thus, there is real value in diagnosing ailments of the genital skin, and dermatologists are well prepared to manage these conditions. Consistently incorporating a genital examination within the TBSE is the first step.

An Approach to the Genital Skin Examination

As with the TBSE, no standardized protocol for the genital skin examination exists, and there is no consensus for how best to perform this evaluation. Ideally, both male and female patients should remove all clothing, including undergarments, though one study found patients preferred to keep undergarments on during the genital examination.10,33,34

In general, adult female genital anatomy is best viewed with the patient in the supine position.6,33,35 There is no clear agreement on the use of stirrups, and the decision to use these may be left to the discretion of the patient. One randomized clinical trial found that women undergoing routine gynecologic examination without stirrups reported less physical discomfort and had a reduced sense of vulnerability than women examined in stirrups.36 During the female genital examination, the head of the bed ideally should be positioned at a 30° to 45° angle to allow the provider to maintain eye contact and face-to-face communication with the patient.33 This positioning also facilitates the use of a handheld mirror to instruct patients on techniques for medication application as well as to point out sites of disease.

For adult males, the genital examination can be performed with the patient standing facing a seated examiner.35 The patient’s gown should be raised to the level of the umbilicus to expose the entire genital region. Good lighting is essential. These recommendations apply mainly to adults, but helpful tips on how to approach evaluating prepubertal children in the dermatology clinic are available.37



The presence of a chaperone also is optional for maximizing patient comfort but also may be helpful for providing medicolegal protection for the provider. It always should be offered regardless of patient gender. A dermatology study found that when patients were examined by a same-gender physician, women and men were more comfortable without a chaperone than with a chaperone, and patients generally preferred fewer bodies in the room during sensitive examinations.9

Educating Patients About the TBSE

The most helpful recommendation for successfully incorporating and performing the genital skin examination as part of the TBSE appears to be patient education. In a randomized double-arm study, patients who received pre-education consisting of written information explaining the need for a TBSE were less likely to be concerned about a genital examination compared to patients who received no information.38 Discussing that skin diseases, including melanoma, can arise in all areas of the body including the genital skin and encouraging patients to perform genital self-examinations is critical.35 In the age of the electronic health record and virtual communication, disseminating this information has become even easier.39 It may be beneficial to explore patients’ TBSE expectations at the outset through these varied avenues to help establish a trusted physician-patient relationship.40

Final Thoughts

Dermatologists should consistently offer a genital examination to all patients who present for a routine TBSE. Patients should be provided with adequate education to assess their comfort level for the skin examination. If a patient declines this examination, the dermatologist should ensure that another physician—be it a gynecologist, primary care provider, or other specialist—is routinely examining the area.6,7

References
  1. The skin exam. American Academy of Dermatology. https://digital-catalog.aad.org/diweb/catalog/launch/package/4/did/327974/iid/327974
  2. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1115-1119.
  3. Nielson CB, Grant-Kels JM. Commentary on “optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E131.
  4. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Reply to: “commentary on ‘optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.’” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E133.
  5. Bajaj S, Wolner ZJ, Dusza SW, et al. Total body skin examination practices: a survey study amongst dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2019;9:132-138.
  6. Krathen MS, Liu CL, Loo DS. Vulvar melanoma: a missed opportunity for early intervention? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:697-698.
  7. Hosking AM, Chapman L, Zachary CB, et al. Anogenital examination practices among U.S. dermatology residents [published online January 9, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.12.061
  8. Grundström H, Wallin K, Berterö C. ‘You expose yourself in so many ways’: young women’s experiences of pelvic examination. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;32:59-64.
  9. McClatchey Connors T, Reddy P, Weiss E, et al. Patient comfort and expectations for total body skin examinations: a cross-sectional study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:615-617.
  10. Houston NA, Secrest AM, Harris RJ, et al. Patient preferences during skin cancer screening examination. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152:1052-1054.
  11. Milchak M, Miller J, Dellasega C, et al. Education on total body skin examination in dermatology residency. Poster presented at: Association of Professors of Dermatology Annual Meeting; September 25-26, 2015; Chicago, IL.
  12. Venkatesan A, Farsani T, O’Sullivan P, et al. Identifying competencies in vulvar disorder management for medical students and residents: a survey of US vulvar disorder experts. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:398-402.
  13. Kirsner RS, Muhkerjee S, Federman DG. Skin cancer screening in primary care: prevalence and barriers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:564-566.
  14. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for gynecologic conditions with pelvic examination: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2017;317:947-953.
  15. Comstock JR, Endo JO, Kornik RI. Adequacy of dermatology and ob-gyn graduate medical education for inflammatory vulvovaginal skin disease: a nationwide needs assessment survey. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2020;6:182-185.
  16. Sanchez A, Rodríguez D, Allard CB, et al. Primary genitourinary melanoma: epidemiology and disease-specific survival in a large population-based cohort. Urol Oncol. 2016;34:E7-E14.
  17. Vyas R, Thompson CL, Zargar H, et al. Epidemiology of genitourinary melanoma in the United States: 1992 through 2012. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:144-150.
  18. Misitzis A, Beatson M, Weinstock MA. Keratinocyte carcinoma mortality in the United States as reported in death certificates, 2011-2017. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1135-1140.
  19. Sullivan AK, Straughair GJ, Marwood RP, et al. A multidisciplinary vulva clinic: the role of genito-urinary medicine. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 1999;13:36-40.
  20. Goncalves DLM, Romero RL, Ferreira PL, et al. Clinical and epidemiological profile of patients attended in a vulvar clinic of the dermatology outpatient unit of a tertiary hospital during a 4-year period. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:1311-1316.
  21. Bauer A, Greif C, Vollandt R, et al. Vulval diseases need an interdisciplinary approach. Dermatology. 1999;199:223-226.
  22. Nunns D, Mandal D. The chronically symptomatic vulva: prevalence in primary health care. Genitourin Med. 1996;72:343-344.
  23. Meeuwis KA, de Hullu JA, de Jager ME, et al. Genital psoriasis: a questionnaire-based survey on a concealed skin disease in the Netherlands. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010;24:1425-1430.
  24. Ryan C, Sadlier M, De Vol E, et al. Genital psoriasis is associated with significant impairment in quality of life and sexual functioning. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:978-983.
  25. Fouéré S, Adjadj L, Pawin H. How patients experience psoriasis: results from a European survey. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005;(19 suppl 3):2-6.
  26. Eisen D. The evaluation of cutaneous, genital, scalp, nail, esophageal, and ocular involvement in patients with oral lichen planus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:431-436.
  27. Meeuwis KAP, Potts Bleakman A, van de Kerkhof PCM, et al. Prevalence of genital psoriasis in patients with psoriasis. J Dermatolog Treat. 2018;29:754-760.
  28. Larsabal M, Ly S, Sbidian E, et al. GENIPSO: a French prospective study assessing instantaneous prevalence, clinical features and impact on quality of life of genital psoriasis among patients consulting for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2019;180:647-656.
  29. Rigel DS, Friedman RJ, Kopf AW, et al. Importance of complete cutaneous examination for the detection of malignant melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1986;14(5 pt 1):857-860.
  30. De Rooij MJ, Rampen FH, Schouten LJ, et al. Total skin examination during screening for malignant melanoma does not increase the detection rate. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:42-45.
  31. Johansson M, Brodersen J, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Screening for reducing morbidity and mortality in malignant melanoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;6:CD012352.
  32. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for skin cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;316:429-435.
  33. Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases: approach to the patient. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1277-1284.
  34. Chen C. How full is a full body skin exam? investigation into the practice of the full body skin exam as conducted by board-certified and board-eligibile dermatologists. Michigan State University. Published April 24, 2015. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.aocd.org/resource/resmgr/2015SpringMeeting/ChenSpr15.pdf
  35. Zikry J, Chapman LW, Korta DZ, et al. Genital melanoma: are we adequately screening our patients? Dermatol Online J. 2017;23:13030/qt7zk476vn.
  36. Seehusen DA, Johnson DR, Earwood JS, et al. Improving women’s experience during speculum examinations at routine gynaecological visits: randomised clinical trial [published online June 27, 2006]. BMJ. 2006;333:171.
  37. Habeshian K, Fowler K, Gomez-Lobo V, et al. Guidelines for pediatric anogenital examination: insights from our vulvar dermatology clinic. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018;35:693-695.
  38. Leffell DJ, Berwick M, Bolognia J. The effect of pre-education on patient compliance with full-body examination in a public skin cancer screening. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1993;19:660-663.
  39. Hong J, Nguyen TV, Prose NS. Compassionate care: enhancing physician-patient communication and education in dermatology: part II: patient education. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:364.e361-310.
  40. Rosamilia LL. The naked truth about total body skin examination: a lesson from Goldilocks and the Three Bears. American Academy of Dermatology. Published November 13, 2019. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://www.aad.org/dw/dw-insights-and-inquiries/2019-archive/november/dwii-11-13-19-the-naked-truth-about-total-body-skin-examination-a-lesson-from-goldilocks-and-the-three-bears
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 107(2)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E29-E32
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Margaret Maria Cocks, MD, PhD ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

A casual survey of my dermatology co-residents yielded overwhelmingly unanimous results: A complete skin check goes from head to toe but does not routinely include an examination of the genital area. This observation contrasts starkly with the American Academy of Dermatology’s Basic Dermatology Curriculum, which recommends inspection of the entire skin surface including the mucous membranes (ie, eyes, mouth, anus, genital area) as part of the total-body skin examination (TBSE).1 It even draws attention to so-called hidden areas where lesions easily can be missed, such as the perianal skin. My observation seems far from anecdotal; even a recent attempt at optimizing movements in the TBSE neglected to include examination of the genitalia in the proposed method,2-4 and many practicing dermatologists seem to agree. A survey of international dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics found male and female genitalia were the least frequently examined anatomy sites during the TBSE. Additionally, female genitalia were examined less frequently than male genitalia (labia majora, 28%; penis, 52%; P=.003).5 Another survey of US academic dermatologists (23 dermatologists, 1 nurse practitioner) found that only 4% always visually inspected the vulva during routine annual examinations, and 50% did not think that vulvar examination was the dermatologist’s responsibility.6 Similar findings were reported in a survey of US dermatology residents.7

Why is the genital area routinely omitted from the dermatologic TBSE? Based on the surveys of dermatologists and dermatology residents, the most common reason cited for not examining these sites was patient discomfort, but there also was a dominant belief that other specialties, such as gynecologists, urologists, or primary care providers, routinely examine these areas.5,7 Time constraints also were a concern.

Although examination of sensitive areas can be uncomfortable,8 most patients still expect these locations to be examined during the TBSE. In a survey of 500 adults presenting for TBSE at an academic dermatology clinic, 84% of respondents expected the dermatologist to examine the genital area.9 Similarly, another survey of patient preferences (N=443) for the TBSE found that only 31.3% of women and 12.5% of men preferred not to have their genital area examined.10 As providers, we may be uncomfortable examining the genital area; however, our patients mostly expect it as part of routine practice. There are a number of barriers that may prevent incorporating the genital examination into daily dermatologic practice.

Training in Genital Examinations

Adequate training may be an issue for provider comfort when examining the genital skin. In a survey of dermatology residency program directors (n=38) and residents (n=91), 61.7% reported receiving formal instruction on TBSE technique and 38.3% reported being self-taught. Examination of the genital skin was included only 40% of the time.11 Even vulvar disorder experts have admitted to receiving their training by self-teaching, with only 19% receiving vulvar training during residency and 11% during fellowship.12 Improving this training appears to be an ongoing effort.2

Passing the Buck

It may be easier to think that another provider is routinely examining genital skin based on the relative absence of this area in dermatologic training; however, that does not appear to be the case. In a 1999 survey of primary care providers, only 31% reported performing skin cancer screenings on their adult patients, citing lack of confidence in this clinical skill as the biggest hurdle.13 Similarly, changes in recommendations for the utility of the screening pelvic examination in asymptomatic, average-risk, nonpregnant adult women have decreased the performance of this examination in actual practice.14 Reviews of resident training in vulvovaginal disease also have shown that although dermatology residents receive slightly less formal training hours on vulvar skin disease, they see more than double the number of patients with vulvar disease per year when compared to obstetrics and gynecology residents.15 In practice, dermatologists generally are more confident when evaluating vulvar pigmented lesions than gynecologists.6

The Importance of the Genital Examination

Looking past these barriers seems essential to providing the best dermatologic care, as there are a multitude of neoplastic and inflammatory dermatoses that can affect the genital skin. Furthermore, early diagnosis and treatment of these conditions potentially can limit morbidity and mortality as well as improve quality of life. Genital melanomas are a good example. Although they may be rare, it is well known that genital melanomas are associated with an aggressive disease course and have worse outcomes than melanomas found elsewhere on the body.16,17 Increasing rates of genital and perianal keratinocyte carcinomas make including this as part of the TBSE even more important.18

We also should not forget that inflammatory conditions can routinely involve the genitals.19-21 Although robust data are lacking, chronic vulvar concerns frequently are seen in the primary care setting. In one study in the United Kingdom, 52% of general practitioners surveyed saw more than 3 patients per month with vulvar concerns.22 Even in common dermatologic conditions such as psoriasis and lichen planus, genital involvement often is overlooked despite its relative frequency.23-27 In one study, 60% of psoriasis patients with genital involvement had not had these lesions examined by a physician.28

 

 



Theoretically, TBSEs that include genital examination would yield higher and earlier detection rates of neoplasms as well as inflammatory dermatoses.29-32 Thus, there is real value in diagnosing ailments of the genital skin, and dermatologists are well prepared to manage these conditions. Consistently incorporating a genital examination within the TBSE is the first step.

An Approach to the Genital Skin Examination

As with the TBSE, no standardized protocol for the genital skin examination exists, and there is no consensus for how best to perform this evaluation. Ideally, both male and female patients should remove all clothing, including undergarments, though one study found patients preferred to keep undergarments on during the genital examination.10,33,34

In general, adult female genital anatomy is best viewed with the patient in the supine position.6,33,35 There is no clear agreement on the use of stirrups, and the decision to use these may be left to the discretion of the patient. One randomized clinical trial found that women undergoing routine gynecologic examination without stirrups reported less physical discomfort and had a reduced sense of vulnerability than women examined in stirrups.36 During the female genital examination, the head of the bed ideally should be positioned at a 30° to 45° angle to allow the provider to maintain eye contact and face-to-face communication with the patient.33 This positioning also facilitates the use of a handheld mirror to instruct patients on techniques for medication application as well as to point out sites of disease.

For adult males, the genital examination can be performed with the patient standing facing a seated examiner.35 The patient’s gown should be raised to the level of the umbilicus to expose the entire genital region. Good lighting is essential. These recommendations apply mainly to adults, but helpful tips on how to approach evaluating prepubertal children in the dermatology clinic are available.37



The presence of a chaperone also is optional for maximizing patient comfort but also may be helpful for providing medicolegal protection for the provider. It always should be offered regardless of patient gender. A dermatology study found that when patients were examined by a same-gender physician, women and men were more comfortable without a chaperone than with a chaperone, and patients generally preferred fewer bodies in the room during sensitive examinations.9

Educating Patients About the TBSE

The most helpful recommendation for successfully incorporating and performing the genital skin examination as part of the TBSE appears to be patient education. In a randomized double-arm study, patients who received pre-education consisting of written information explaining the need for a TBSE were less likely to be concerned about a genital examination compared to patients who received no information.38 Discussing that skin diseases, including melanoma, can arise in all areas of the body including the genital skin and encouraging patients to perform genital self-examinations is critical.35 In the age of the electronic health record and virtual communication, disseminating this information has become even easier.39 It may be beneficial to explore patients’ TBSE expectations at the outset through these varied avenues to help establish a trusted physician-patient relationship.40

Final Thoughts

Dermatologists should consistently offer a genital examination to all patients who present for a routine TBSE. Patients should be provided with adequate education to assess their comfort level for the skin examination. If a patient declines this examination, the dermatologist should ensure that another physician—be it a gynecologist, primary care provider, or other specialist—is routinely examining the area.6,7

A casual survey of my dermatology co-residents yielded overwhelmingly unanimous results: A complete skin check goes from head to toe but does not routinely include an examination of the genital area. This observation contrasts starkly with the American Academy of Dermatology’s Basic Dermatology Curriculum, which recommends inspection of the entire skin surface including the mucous membranes (ie, eyes, mouth, anus, genital area) as part of the total-body skin examination (TBSE).1 It even draws attention to so-called hidden areas where lesions easily can be missed, such as the perianal skin. My observation seems far from anecdotal; even a recent attempt at optimizing movements in the TBSE neglected to include examination of the genitalia in the proposed method,2-4 and many practicing dermatologists seem to agree. A survey of international dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics found male and female genitalia were the least frequently examined anatomy sites during the TBSE. Additionally, female genitalia were examined less frequently than male genitalia (labia majora, 28%; penis, 52%; P=.003).5 Another survey of US academic dermatologists (23 dermatologists, 1 nurse practitioner) found that only 4% always visually inspected the vulva during routine annual examinations, and 50% did not think that vulvar examination was the dermatologist’s responsibility.6 Similar findings were reported in a survey of US dermatology residents.7

Why is the genital area routinely omitted from the dermatologic TBSE? Based on the surveys of dermatologists and dermatology residents, the most common reason cited for not examining these sites was patient discomfort, but there also was a dominant belief that other specialties, such as gynecologists, urologists, or primary care providers, routinely examine these areas.5,7 Time constraints also were a concern.

Although examination of sensitive areas can be uncomfortable,8 most patients still expect these locations to be examined during the TBSE. In a survey of 500 adults presenting for TBSE at an academic dermatology clinic, 84% of respondents expected the dermatologist to examine the genital area.9 Similarly, another survey of patient preferences (N=443) for the TBSE found that only 31.3% of women and 12.5% of men preferred not to have their genital area examined.10 As providers, we may be uncomfortable examining the genital area; however, our patients mostly expect it as part of routine practice. There are a number of barriers that may prevent incorporating the genital examination into daily dermatologic practice.

Training in Genital Examinations

Adequate training may be an issue for provider comfort when examining the genital skin. In a survey of dermatology residency program directors (n=38) and residents (n=91), 61.7% reported receiving formal instruction on TBSE technique and 38.3% reported being self-taught. Examination of the genital skin was included only 40% of the time.11 Even vulvar disorder experts have admitted to receiving their training by self-teaching, with only 19% receiving vulvar training during residency and 11% during fellowship.12 Improving this training appears to be an ongoing effort.2

Passing the Buck

It may be easier to think that another provider is routinely examining genital skin based on the relative absence of this area in dermatologic training; however, that does not appear to be the case. In a 1999 survey of primary care providers, only 31% reported performing skin cancer screenings on their adult patients, citing lack of confidence in this clinical skill as the biggest hurdle.13 Similarly, changes in recommendations for the utility of the screening pelvic examination in asymptomatic, average-risk, nonpregnant adult women have decreased the performance of this examination in actual practice.14 Reviews of resident training in vulvovaginal disease also have shown that although dermatology residents receive slightly less formal training hours on vulvar skin disease, they see more than double the number of patients with vulvar disease per year when compared to obstetrics and gynecology residents.15 In practice, dermatologists generally are more confident when evaluating vulvar pigmented lesions than gynecologists.6

The Importance of the Genital Examination

Looking past these barriers seems essential to providing the best dermatologic care, as there are a multitude of neoplastic and inflammatory dermatoses that can affect the genital skin. Furthermore, early diagnosis and treatment of these conditions potentially can limit morbidity and mortality as well as improve quality of life. Genital melanomas are a good example. Although they may be rare, it is well known that genital melanomas are associated with an aggressive disease course and have worse outcomes than melanomas found elsewhere on the body.16,17 Increasing rates of genital and perianal keratinocyte carcinomas make including this as part of the TBSE even more important.18

We also should not forget that inflammatory conditions can routinely involve the genitals.19-21 Although robust data are lacking, chronic vulvar concerns frequently are seen in the primary care setting. In one study in the United Kingdom, 52% of general practitioners surveyed saw more than 3 patients per month with vulvar concerns.22 Even in common dermatologic conditions such as psoriasis and lichen planus, genital involvement often is overlooked despite its relative frequency.23-27 In one study, 60% of psoriasis patients with genital involvement had not had these lesions examined by a physician.28

 

 



Theoretically, TBSEs that include genital examination would yield higher and earlier detection rates of neoplasms as well as inflammatory dermatoses.29-32 Thus, there is real value in diagnosing ailments of the genital skin, and dermatologists are well prepared to manage these conditions. Consistently incorporating a genital examination within the TBSE is the first step.

An Approach to the Genital Skin Examination

As with the TBSE, no standardized protocol for the genital skin examination exists, and there is no consensus for how best to perform this evaluation. Ideally, both male and female patients should remove all clothing, including undergarments, though one study found patients preferred to keep undergarments on during the genital examination.10,33,34

In general, adult female genital anatomy is best viewed with the patient in the supine position.6,33,35 There is no clear agreement on the use of stirrups, and the decision to use these may be left to the discretion of the patient. One randomized clinical trial found that women undergoing routine gynecologic examination without stirrups reported less physical discomfort and had a reduced sense of vulnerability than women examined in stirrups.36 During the female genital examination, the head of the bed ideally should be positioned at a 30° to 45° angle to allow the provider to maintain eye contact and face-to-face communication with the patient.33 This positioning also facilitates the use of a handheld mirror to instruct patients on techniques for medication application as well as to point out sites of disease.

For adult males, the genital examination can be performed with the patient standing facing a seated examiner.35 The patient’s gown should be raised to the level of the umbilicus to expose the entire genital region. Good lighting is essential. These recommendations apply mainly to adults, but helpful tips on how to approach evaluating prepubertal children in the dermatology clinic are available.37



The presence of a chaperone also is optional for maximizing patient comfort but also may be helpful for providing medicolegal protection for the provider. It always should be offered regardless of patient gender. A dermatology study found that when patients were examined by a same-gender physician, women and men were more comfortable without a chaperone than with a chaperone, and patients generally preferred fewer bodies in the room during sensitive examinations.9

Educating Patients About the TBSE

The most helpful recommendation for successfully incorporating and performing the genital skin examination as part of the TBSE appears to be patient education. In a randomized double-arm study, patients who received pre-education consisting of written information explaining the need for a TBSE were less likely to be concerned about a genital examination compared to patients who received no information.38 Discussing that skin diseases, including melanoma, can arise in all areas of the body including the genital skin and encouraging patients to perform genital self-examinations is critical.35 In the age of the electronic health record and virtual communication, disseminating this information has become even easier.39 It may be beneficial to explore patients’ TBSE expectations at the outset through these varied avenues to help establish a trusted physician-patient relationship.40

Final Thoughts

Dermatologists should consistently offer a genital examination to all patients who present for a routine TBSE. Patients should be provided with adequate education to assess their comfort level for the skin examination. If a patient declines this examination, the dermatologist should ensure that another physician—be it a gynecologist, primary care provider, or other specialist—is routinely examining the area.6,7

References
  1. The skin exam. American Academy of Dermatology. https://digital-catalog.aad.org/diweb/catalog/launch/package/4/did/327974/iid/327974
  2. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1115-1119.
  3. Nielson CB, Grant-Kels JM. Commentary on “optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E131.
  4. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Reply to: “commentary on ‘optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.’” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E133.
  5. Bajaj S, Wolner ZJ, Dusza SW, et al. Total body skin examination practices: a survey study amongst dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2019;9:132-138.
  6. Krathen MS, Liu CL, Loo DS. Vulvar melanoma: a missed opportunity for early intervention? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:697-698.
  7. Hosking AM, Chapman L, Zachary CB, et al. Anogenital examination practices among U.S. dermatology residents [published online January 9, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.12.061
  8. Grundström H, Wallin K, Berterö C. ‘You expose yourself in so many ways’: young women’s experiences of pelvic examination. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;32:59-64.
  9. McClatchey Connors T, Reddy P, Weiss E, et al. Patient comfort and expectations for total body skin examinations: a cross-sectional study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:615-617.
  10. Houston NA, Secrest AM, Harris RJ, et al. Patient preferences during skin cancer screening examination. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152:1052-1054.
  11. Milchak M, Miller J, Dellasega C, et al. Education on total body skin examination in dermatology residency. Poster presented at: Association of Professors of Dermatology Annual Meeting; September 25-26, 2015; Chicago, IL.
  12. Venkatesan A, Farsani T, O’Sullivan P, et al. Identifying competencies in vulvar disorder management for medical students and residents: a survey of US vulvar disorder experts. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:398-402.
  13. Kirsner RS, Muhkerjee S, Federman DG. Skin cancer screening in primary care: prevalence and barriers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:564-566.
  14. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for gynecologic conditions with pelvic examination: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2017;317:947-953.
  15. Comstock JR, Endo JO, Kornik RI. Adequacy of dermatology and ob-gyn graduate medical education for inflammatory vulvovaginal skin disease: a nationwide needs assessment survey. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2020;6:182-185.
  16. Sanchez A, Rodríguez D, Allard CB, et al. Primary genitourinary melanoma: epidemiology and disease-specific survival in a large population-based cohort. Urol Oncol. 2016;34:E7-E14.
  17. Vyas R, Thompson CL, Zargar H, et al. Epidemiology of genitourinary melanoma in the United States: 1992 through 2012. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:144-150.
  18. Misitzis A, Beatson M, Weinstock MA. Keratinocyte carcinoma mortality in the United States as reported in death certificates, 2011-2017. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1135-1140.
  19. Sullivan AK, Straughair GJ, Marwood RP, et al. A multidisciplinary vulva clinic: the role of genito-urinary medicine. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 1999;13:36-40.
  20. Goncalves DLM, Romero RL, Ferreira PL, et al. Clinical and epidemiological profile of patients attended in a vulvar clinic of the dermatology outpatient unit of a tertiary hospital during a 4-year period. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:1311-1316.
  21. Bauer A, Greif C, Vollandt R, et al. Vulval diseases need an interdisciplinary approach. Dermatology. 1999;199:223-226.
  22. Nunns D, Mandal D. The chronically symptomatic vulva: prevalence in primary health care. Genitourin Med. 1996;72:343-344.
  23. Meeuwis KA, de Hullu JA, de Jager ME, et al. Genital psoriasis: a questionnaire-based survey on a concealed skin disease in the Netherlands. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010;24:1425-1430.
  24. Ryan C, Sadlier M, De Vol E, et al. Genital psoriasis is associated with significant impairment in quality of life and sexual functioning. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:978-983.
  25. Fouéré S, Adjadj L, Pawin H. How patients experience psoriasis: results from a European survey. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005;(19 suppl 3):2-6.
  26. Eisen D. The evaluation of cutaneous, genital, scalp, nail, esophageal, and ocular involvement in patients with oral lichen planus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:431-436.
  27. Meeuwis KAP, Potts Bleakman A, van de Kerkhof PCM, et al. Prevalence of genital psoriasis in patients with psoriasis. J Dermatolog Treat. 2018;29:754-760.
  28. Larsabal M, Ly S, Sbidian E, et al. GENIPSO: a French prospective study assessing instantaneous prevalence, clinical features and impact on quality of life of genital psoriasis among patients consulting for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2019;180:647-656.
  29. Rigel DS, Friedman RJ, Kopf AW, et al. Importance of complete cutaneous examination for the detection of malignant melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1986;14(5 pt 1):857-860.
  30. De Rooij MJ, Rampen FH, Schouten LJ, et al. Total skin examination during screening for malignant melanoma does not increase the detection rate. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:42-45.
  31. Johansson M, Brodersen J, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Screening for reducing morbidity and mortality in malignant melanoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;6:CD012352.
  32. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for skin cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;316:429-435.
  33. Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases: approach to the patient. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1277-1284.
  34. Chen C. How full is a full body skin exam? investigation into the practice of the full body skin exam as conducted by board-certified and board-eligibile dermatologists. Michigan State University. Published April 24, 2015. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.aocd.org/resource/resmgr/2015SpringMeeting/ChenSpr15.pdf
  35. Zikry J, Chapman LW, Korta DZ, et al. Genital melanoma: are we adequately screening our patients? Dermatol Online J. 2017;23:13030/qt7zk476vn.
  36. Seehusen DA, Johnson DR, Earwood JS, et al. Improving women’s experience during speculum examinations at routine gynaecological visits: randomised clinical trial [published online June 27, 2006]. BMJ. 2006;333:171.
  37. Habeshian K, Fowler K, Gomez-Lobo V, et al. Guidelines for pediatric anogenital examination: insights from our vulvar dermatology clinic. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018;35:693-695.
  38. Leffell DJ, Berwick M, Bolognia J. The effect of pre-education on patient compliance with full-body examination in a public skin cancer screening. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1993;19:660-663.
  39. Hong J, Nguyen TV, Prose NS. Compassionate care: enhancing physician-patient communication and education in dermatology: part II: patient education. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:364.e361-310.
  40. Rosamilia LL. The naked truth about total body skin examination: a lesson from Goldilocks and the Three Bears. American Academy of Dermatology. Published November 13, 2019. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://www.aad.org/dw/dw-insights-and-inquiries/2019-archive/november/dwii-11-13-19-the-naked-truth-about-total-body-skin-examination-a-lesson-from-goldilocks-and-the-three-bears
References
  1. The skin exam. American Academy of Dermatology. https://digital-catalog.aad.org/diweb/catalog/launch/package/4/did/327974/iid/327974
  2. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1115-1119.
  3. Nielson CB, Grant-Kels JM. Commentary on “optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E131.
  4. Helm MF, Hallock KK, Bisbee E, et al. Reply to: “commentary on ‘optimizing the total-body skin exam: an observational cohort study.’” J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:E133.
  5. Bajaj S, Wolner ZJ, Dusza SW, et al. Total body skin examination practices: a survey study amongst dermatologists at high-risk skin cancer clinics. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2019;9:132-138.
  6. Krathen MS, Liu CL, Loo DS. Vulvar melanoma: a missed opportunity for early intervention? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012;66:697-698.
  7. Hosking AM, Chapman L, Zachary CB, et al. Anogenital examination practices among U.S. dermatology residents [published online January 9, 2020]. J Am Acad Dermatol. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.12.061
  8. Grundström H, Wallin K, Berterö C. ‘You expose yourself in so many ways’: young women’s experiences of pelvic examination. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;32:59-64.
  9. McClatchey Connors T, Reddy P, Weiss E, et al. Patient comfort and expectations for total body skin examinations: a cross-sectional study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:615-617.
  10. Houston NA, Secrest AM, Harris RJ, et al. Patient preferences during skin cancer screening examination. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152:1052-1054.
  11. Milchak M, Miller J, Dellasega C, et al. Education on total body skin examination in dermatology residency. Poster presented at: Association of Professors of Dermatology Annual Meeting; September 25-26, 2015; Chicago, IL.
  12. Venkatesan A, Farsani T, O’Sullivan P, et al. Identifying competencies in vulvar disorder management for medical students and residents: a survey of US vulvar disorder experts. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012;16:398-402.
  13. Kirsner RS, Muhkerjee S, Federman DG. Skin cancer screening in primary care: prevalence and barriers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999;41:564-566.
  14. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for gynecologic conditions with pelvic examination: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2017;317:947-953.
  15. Comstock JR, Endo JO, Kornik RI. Adequacy of dermatology and ob-gyn graduate medical education for inflammatory vulvovaginal skin disease: a nationwide needs assessment survey. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2020;6:182-185.
  16. Sanchez A, Rodríguez D, Allard CB, et al. Primary genitourinary melanoma: epidemiology and disease-specific survival in a large population-based cohort. Urol Oncol. 2016;34:E7-E14.
  17. Vyas R, Thompson CL, Zargar H, et al. Epidemiology of genitourinary melanoma in the United States: 1992 through 2012. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:144-150.
  18. Misitzis A, Beatson M, Weinstock MA. Keratinocyte carcinoma mortality in the United States as reported in death certificates, 2011-2017. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1135-1140.
  19. Sullivan AK, Straughair GJ, Marwood RP, et al. A multidisciplinary vulva clinic: the role of genito-urinary medicine. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 1999;13:36-40.
  20. Goncalves DLM, Romero RL, Ferreira PL, et al. Clinical and epidemiological profile of patients attended in a vulvar clinic of the dermatology outpatient unit of a tertiary hospital during a 4-year period. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:1311-1316.
  21. Bauer A, Greif C, Vollandt R, et al. Vulval diseases need an interdisciplinary approach. Dermatology. 1999;199:223-226.
  22. Nunns D, Mandal D. The chronically symptomatic vulva: prevalence in primary health care. Genitourin Med. 1996;72:343-344.
  23. Meeuwis KA, de Hullu JA, de Jager ME, et al. Genital psoriasis: a questionnaire-based survey on a concealed skin disease in the Netherlands. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010;24:1425-1430.
  24. Ryan C, Sadlier M, De Vol E, et al. Genital psoriasis is associated with significant impairment in quality of life and sexual functioning. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:978-983.
  25. Fouéré S, Adjadj L, Pawin H. How patients experience psoriasis: results from a European survey. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005;(19 suppl 3):2-6.
  26. Eisen D. The evaluation of cutaneous, genital, scalp, nail, esophageal, and ocular involvement in patients with oral lichen planus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;88:431-436.
  27. Meeuwis KAP, Potts Bleakman A, van de Kerkhof PCM, et al. Prevalence of genital psoriasis in patients with psoriasis. J Dermatolog Treat. 2018;29:754-760.
  28. Larsabal M, Ly S, Sbidian E, et al. GENIPSO: a French prospective study assessing instantaneous prevalence, clinical features and impact on quality of life of genital psoriasis among patients consulting for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol. 2019;180:647-656.
  29. Rigel DS, Friedman RJ, Kopf AW, et al. Importance of complete cutaneous examination for the detection of malignant melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1986;14(5 pt 1):857-860.
  30. De Rooij MJ, Rampen FH, Schouten LJ, et al. Total skin examination during screening for malignant melanoma does not increase the detection rate. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:42-45.
  31. Johansson M, Brodersen J, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Screening for reducing morbidity and mortality in malignant melanoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;6:CD012352.
  32. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for skin cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;316:429-435.
  33. Mauskar MM, Marathe K, Venkatesan A, et al. Vulvar diseases: approach to the patient. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:1277-1284.
  34. Chen C. How full is a full body skin exam? investigation into the practice of the full body skin exam as conducted by board-certified and board-eligibile dermatologists. Michigan State University. Published April 24, 2015. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.aocd.org/resource/resmgr/2015SpringMeeting/ChenSpr15.pdf
  35. Zikry J, Chapman LW, Korta DZ, et al. Genital melanoma: are we adequately screening our patients? Dermatol Online J. 2017;23:13030/qt7zk476vn.
  36. Seehusen DA, Johnson DR, Earwood JS, et al. Improving women’s experience during speculum examinations at routine gynaecological visits: randomised clinical trial [published online June 27, 2006]. BMJ. 2006;333:171.
  37. Habeshian K, Fowler K, Gomez-Lobo V, et al. Guidelines for pediatric anogenital examination: insights from our vulvar dermatology clinic. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018;35:693-695.
  38. Leffell DJ, Berwick M, Bolognia J. The effect of pre-education on patient compliance with full-body examination in a public skin cancer screening. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1993;19:660-663.
  39. Hong J, Nguyen TV, Prose NS. Compassionate care: enhancing physician-patient communication and education in dermatology: part II: patient education. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:364.e361-310.
  40. Rosamilia LL. The naked truth about total body skin examination: a lesson from Goldilocks and the Three Bears. American Academy of Dermatology. Published November 13, 2019. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://www.aad.org/dw/dw-insights-and-inquiries/2019-archive/november/dwii-11-13-19-the-naked-truth-about-total-body-skin-examination-a-lesson-from-goldilocks-and-the-three-bears
Issue
Cutis - 107(2)
Issue
Cutis - 107(2)
Page Number
E29-E32
Page Number
E29-E32
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearls

  • Dermatologists should offer a genital examination to all patients who present for a routine total-body skin examination.
  • It is critical to educate patients about the importance of examining the genital skin by discussing that skin diseases can arise in all areas of the body including the genital area. Encouraging genital self-examination also is helpful.
  • If a patient declines, the dermatologist should strive to ensure that another provider is examining the genital skin.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Article PDF Media

Advice for Applying to Dermatology as an Applicant of Color: Keep Going

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 03/16/2021 - 08:54

As the dermatology admissions cycle restarts, I reflect back on my journey as a Black woman applying to dermatology. Before deciding, I internally questioned, “Is dermatology right for me?” There were not many faces that looked like mine within the field. After committing to dermatology, I asked dermatologists—almost any who would spare a few minutes to talk to me—how to get into this specialty and be successful when applying. I spoke to advisors and friends at my home department, emailed dermatologists far and wide, approached conference lecturers after their presentations, sought out advice from current residents, and asked prior applicants what they thought was important to match into dermatology. There had been too many unmatched students before me who had achieved good grades and aced US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1. The equation for success was missing a variable.

Mentorship

One weekend, I attended a conference for patients with skin of color. I talked to a student who had taken a year off (retroactively after not matching in prior years). She told me that the biggest key to matching was mentorship; forming a strong relationship with a clinician or investigator who had seen how well you perform in clinic or during research was paramount. Having a collaborator or instructor write you a letter of recommendation and make calls on your behalf could be the difference between matching or taking another year off. More often than any other aspect of the application, it is a lack of mentorship that many students of color do not have access to when pursuing a highly competitive specialty such as dermatology.1,2 In such a small field, applicants need someone to vouch for them—to speak on their behalf compassionately, invite them to collaborate on research projects, and inform them of conference opportunities to present their work.

Representation in Dermatology

We are told that you can accomplish anything with hard work and grit; however, without the platform to show how effectively you have worked, your efforts may never be seen. The diversity statistics for dermatology are clear and disheartening. Although 13% of Americans are Black, only 3% of all dermatologists are Black.2,3 Just over 4% of dermatologists are Hispanic compared with 16% of the general population. The Association of American Medical Colleges reported that the overall 2015 medical school acceptance rate was 41%.4 White (44%), Asian (42%), and Hispanic or Latino (42%) applicants all had similar acceptance rates; however, only one-third of Black applicants were accepted. At graduation in 2015, White individuals were 51% of matriculants. Medical graduates were only 6% Black.4 What percentage of these 6% Black graduates thought about applying into dermatology? How many had someone to encourage them to pursue the specialty or a mentor who they could ask about the nuances and strategy to be a competitive applicant?

In addition to discrimination, social psychologists have described stereotype threat, a risk for minorities that occurs when negative stereotypes associated with an individual’s group status become relevant after perceived cues.5 Therefore, some students of color might avoid competitive specialties such as dermatology because of this internalized lack of confidence in their own abilities and performance thinking, “I’ll never be good enough to match into dermatology.” I have seen this discouraging perception when classmates doubt their own talent and achievements, which is a variation of imposter syndrome—when an individual doubts their abilities and may have an internal fear of eventually being exposed as a fraud.



After several publications received press coverage on the lack of diversity in dermatology applicant selection,3,6,7 I looked around at my interview group composed of 25 to 40 interviewees and on average saw 2 to 3 Black applicants around the room. We always found a way during the packed interview day to find time to introduce ourselves. I almost always left with a new friend who shared feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, hope, and gratefulness from being the few Black people in the room. Bootstrapping might have helped us to make it into medical school, pass shelf examinations, and even get a great Step 1 score. However, the addition of mentorship—or better yet, sponsorship—helped to get us an interview in this competitive field. The impact of mentorship has been especially true for research, which has shown that students often gravitate toward mentors who look like them.8 However, the reality is that many Black and Hispanic students may be at a disadvantage for finding mentors in this way given that there are less than 10% of dermatologists who identify as individuals with skin of color. During the process of applying to dermatology, my greatest advocates were ethnically and racially diverse. The proverb is that it takes a village to raise a child; this reality extends to the medical student’s ability to thrive, not only in residency but also in the residency application process. My sponsors have been as different as their advice and perspectives, which helped me to think about the varied ways I viewed myself as an applicant and shaped what I looked for in residency.

Final Thoughts

Now that I have been a resident in the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, I excitedly look for opportunities to mentor medical students and help create equity in the application process. Dermatology needs to increase the representation of minority applicants. Efforts to encourage minority medical students include joining the National Medical Association dermatology section through the Student National Medical Association, membership in the Skin of Color Society, getting involved with the Dermatology Interest Group at more medical schools, and awareness of medical student–friendly dermatology conferences. In addition, I was able to establish lifelong mentorship through the American Academy of Dermatology’s Minority Diversity Mentorship Program. One important component is an enhanced effort to increase the number of financial scholarships for away rotations (post–coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic) or application expenses geared to help underrepresented minorities. To truly increase diversity in dermatology, perhaps we need more physicians and residents willing to encourage students of color that dermatology is achievable.

References
  1. Brunsma DL, Embrick DG, Shin JH. Graduate students of color: race, racism, and mentoring in the white waters of academia. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2017;3:1-13.
  2. Oyesanya T, Grossberg AL, Okoye GA. Increasing minority representation in the dermatology department: the Johns Hopkins experience. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1133-1134.
  3. Pandya AG, Alexis AF, Berger TG, et al. Increasing racial and ethnic diversity in dermatology: a call to action. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:584-587.
  4. Current trends in medical education. American Association of Medical Colleges. Accessed January 20, 2021. http://www.aamcdiversityfactsandfigures2016.org/report-section/section-3/
  5. Spencer SJ, Logel C, Davies PG. Stereotype threat [published online September 10, 2015]. Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:415-437.
  6. Granstein RD, Cornelius L, Shinkai K. Diversity in dermatology—a call for action. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:499-500.
  7. Pritchett EN, Pandya AG, Ferguson NN, et al. Diversity in dermatology: roadmap for improvement. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:337-341.
  8. Blake-Beard S, Bayne ML, Crosby FJ, et al. Matching by race and gender in mentoring relationships: keeping our eyes on the prize. J Social Issues. 2011;67:622-643.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]). 

Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E15-E16
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]). 

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Nicole A. Negbenebor, MD ([email protected]). 

Article PDF
Article PDF

As the dermatology admissions cycle restarts, I reflect back on my journey as a Black woman applying to dermatology. Before deciding, I internally questioned, “Is dermatology right for me?” There were not many faces that looked like mine within the field. After committing to dermatology, I asked dermatologists—almost any who would spare a few minutes to talk to me—how to get into this specialty and be successful when applying. I spoke to advisors and friends at my home department, emailed dermatologists far and wide, approached conference lecturers after their presentations, sought out advice from current residents, and asked prior applicants what they thought was important to match into dermatology. There had been too many unmatched students before me who had achieved good grades and aced US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1. The equation for success was missing a variable.

Mentorship

One weekend, I attended a conference for patients with skin of color. I talked to a student who had taken a year off (retroactively after not matching in prior years). She told me that the biggest key to matching was mentorship; forming a strong relationship with a clinician or investigator who had seen how well you perform in clinic or during research was paramount. Having a collaborator or instructor write you a letter of recommendation and make calls on your behalf could be the difference between matching or taking another year off. More often than any other aspect of the application, it is a lack of mentorship that many students of color do not have access to when pursuing a highly competitive specialty such as dermatology.1,2 In such a small field, applicants need someone to vouch for them—to speak on their behalf compassionately, invite them to collaborate on research projects, and inform them of conference opportunities to present their work.

Representation in Dermatology

We are told that you can accomplish anything with hard work and grit; however, without the platform to show how effectively you have worked, your efforts may never be seen. The diversity statistics for dermatology are clear and disheartening. Although 13% of Americans are Black, only 3% of all dermatologists are Black.2,3 Just over 4% of dermatologists are Hispanic compared with 16% of the general population. The Association of American Medical Colleges reported that the overall 2015 medical school acceptance rate was 41%.4 White (44%), Asian (42%), and Hispanic or Latino (42%) applicants all had similar acceptance rates; however, only one-third of Black applicants were accepted. At graduation in 2015, White individuals were 51% of matriculants. Medical graduates were only 6% Black.4 What percentage of these 6% Black graduates thought about applying into dermatology? How many had someone to encourage them to pursue the specialty or a mentor who they could ask about the nuances and strategy to be a competitive applicant?

In addition to discrimination, social psychologists have described stereotype threat, a risk for minorities that occurs when negative stereotypes associated with an individual’s group status become relevant after perceived cues.5 Therefore, some students of color might avoid competitive specialties such as dermatology because of this internalized lack of confidence in their own abilities and performance thinking, “I’ll never be good enough to match into dermatology.” I have seen this discouraging perception when classmates doubt their own talent and achievements, which is a variation of imposter syndrome—when an individual doubts their abilities and may have an internal fear of eventually being exposed as a fraud.



After several publications received press coverage on the lack of diversity in dermatology applicant selection,3,6,7 I looked around at my interview group composed of 25 to 40 interviewees and on average saw 2 to 3 Black applicants around the room. We always found a way during the packed interview day to find time to introduce ourselves. I almost always left with a new friend who shared feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, hope, and gratefulness from being the few Black people in the room. Bootstrapping might have helped us to make it into medical school, pass shelf examinations, and even get a great Step 1 score. However, the addition of mentorship—or better yet, sponsorship—helped to get us an interview in this competitive field. The impact of mentorship has been especially true for research, which has shown that students often gravitate toward mentors who look like them.8 However, the reality is that many Black and Hispanic students may be at a disadvantage for finding mentors in this way given that there are less than 10% of dermatologists who identify as individuals with skin of color. During the process of applying to dermatology, my greatest advocates were ethnically and racially diverse. The proverb is that it takes a village to raise a child; this reality extends to the medical student’s ability to thrive, not only in residency but also in the residency application process. My sponsors have been as different as their advice and perspectives, which helped me to think about the varied ways I viewed myself as an applicant and shaped what I looked for in residency.

Final Thoughts

Now that I have been a resident in the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, I excitedly look for opportunities to mentor medical students and help create equity in the application process. Dermatology needs to increase the representation of minority applicants. Efforts to encourage minority medical students include joining the National Medical Association dermatology section through the Student National Medical Association, membership in the Skin of Color Society, getting involved with the Dermatology Interest Group at more medical schools, and awareness of medical student–friendly dermatology conferences. In addition, I was able to establish lifelong mentorship through the American Academy of Dermatology’s Minority Diversity Mentorship Program. One important component is an enhanced effort to increase the number of financial scholarships for away rotations (post–coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic) or application expenses geared to help underrepresented minorities. To truly increase diversity in dermatology, perhaps we need more physicians and residents willing to encourage students of color that dermatology is achievable.

As the dermatology admissions cycle restarts, I reflect back on my journey as a Black woman applying to dermatology. Before deciding, I internally questioned, “Is dermatology right for me?” There were not many faces that looked like mine within the field. After committing to dermatology, I asked dermatologists—almost any who would spare a few minutes to talk to me—how to get into this specialty and be successful when applying. I spoke to advisors and friends at my home department, emailed dermatologists far and wide, approached conference lecturers after their presentations, sought out advice from current residents, and asked prior applicants what they thought was important to match into dermatology. There had been too many unmatched students before me who had achieved good grades and aced US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1. The equation for success was missing a variable.

Mentorship

One weekend, I attended a conference for patients with skin of color. I talked to a student who had taken a year off (retroactively after not matching in prior years). She told me that the biggest key to matching was mentorship; forming a strong relationship with a clinician or investigator who had seen how well you perform in clinic or during research was paramount. Having a collaborator or instructor write you a letter of recommendation and make calls on your behalf could be the difference between matching or taking another year off. More often than any other aspect of the application, it is a lack of mentorship that many students of color do not have access to when pursuing a highly competitive specialty such as dermatology.1,2 In such a small field, applicants need someone to vouch for them—to speak on their behalf compassionately, invite them to collaborate on research projects, and inform them of conference opportunities to present their work.

Representation in Dermatology

We are told that you can accomplish anything with hard work and grit; however, without the platform to show how effectively you have worked, your efforts may never be seen. The diversity statistics for dermatology are clear and disheartening. Although 13% of Americans are Black, only 3% of all dermatologists are Black.2,3 Just over 4% of dermatologists are Hispanic compared with 16% of the general population. The Association of American Medical Colleges reported that the overall 2015 medical school acceptance rate was 41%.4 White (44%), Asian (42%), and Hispanic or Latino (42%) applicants all had similar acceptance rates; however, only one-third of Black applicants were accepted. At graduation in 2015, White individuals were 51% of matriculants. Medical graduates were only 6% Black.4 What percentage of these 6% Black graduates thought about applying into dermatology? How many had someone to encourage them to pursue the specialty or a mentor who they could ask about the nuances and strategy to be a competitive applicant?

In addition to discrimination, social psychologists have described stereotype threat, a risk for minorities that occurs when negative stereotypes associated with an individual’s group status become relevant after perceived cues.5 Therefore, some students of color might avoid competitive specialties such as dermatology because of this internalized lack of confidence in their own abilities and performance thinking, “I’ll never be good enough to match into dermatology.” I have seen this discouraging perception when classmates doubt their own talent and achievements, which is a variation of imposter syndrome—when an individual doubts their abilities and may have an internal fear of eventually being exposed as a fraud.



After several publications received press coverage on the lack of diversity in dermatology applicant selection,3,6,7 I looked around at my interview group composed of 25 to 40 interviewees and on average saw 2 to 3 Black applicants around the room. We always found a way during the packed interview day to find time to introduce ourselves. I almost always left with a new friend who shared feelings of anxiety, uncertainty, hope, and gratefulness from being the few Black people in the room. Bootstrapping might have helped us to make it into medical school, pass shelf examinations, and even get a great Step 1 score. However, the addition of mentorship—or better yet, sponsorship—helped to get us an interview in this competitive field. The impact of mentorship has been especially true for research, which has shown that students often gravitate toward mentors who look like them.8 However, the reality is that many Black and Hispanic students may be at a disadvantage for finding mentors in this way given that there are less than 10% of dermatologists who identify as individuals with skin of color. During the process of applying to dermatology, my greatest advocates were ethnically and racially diverse. The proverb is that it takes a village to raise a child; this reality extends to the medical student’s ability to thrive, not only in residency but also in the residency application process. My sponsors have been as different as their advice and perspectives, which helped me to think about the varied ways I viewed myself as an applicant and shaped what I looked for in residency.

Final Thoughts

Now that I have been a resident in the Department of Dermatology at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, I excitedly look for opportunities to mentor medical students and help create equity in the application process. Dermatology needs to increase the representation of minority applicants. Efforts to encourage minority medical students include joining the National Medical Association dermatology section through the Student National Medical Association, membership in the Skin of Color Society, getting involved with the Dermatology Interest Group at more medical schools, and awareness of medical student–friendly dermatology conferences. In addition, I was able to establish lifelong mentorship through the American Academy of Dermatology’s Minority Diversity Mentorship Program. One important component is an enhanced effort to increase the number of financial scholarships for away rotations (post–coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic) or application expenses geared to help underrepresented minorities. To truly increase diversity in dermatology, perhaps we need more physicians and residents willing to encourage students of color that dermatology is achievable.

References
  1. Brunsma DL, Embrick DG, Shin JH. Graduate students of color: race, racism, and mentoring in the white waters of academia. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2017;3:1-13.
  2. Oyesanya T, Grossberg AL, Okoye GA. Increasing minority representation in the dermatology department: the Johns Hopkins experience. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1133-1134.
  3. Pandya AG, Alexis AF, Berger TG, et al. Increasing racial and ethnic diversity in dermatology: a call to action. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:584-587.
  4. Current trends in medical education. American Association of Medical Colleges. Accessed January 20, 2021. http://www.aamcdiversityfactsandfigures2016.org/report-section/section-3/
  5. Spencer SJ, Logel C, Davies PG. Stereotype threat [published online September 10, 2015]. Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:415-437.
  6. Granstein RD, Cornelius L, Shinkai K. Diversity in dermatology—a call for action. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:499-500.
  7. Pritchett EN, Pandya AG, Ferguson NN, et al. Diversity in dermatology: roadmap for improvement. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:337-341.
  8. Blake-Beard S, Bayne ML, Crosby FJ, et al. Matching by race and gender in mentoring relationships: keeping our eyes on the prize. J Social Issues. 2011;67:622-643.
References
  1. Brunsma DL, Embrick DG, Shin JH. Graduate students of color: race, racism, and mentoring in the white waters of academia. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity. 2017;3:1-13.
  2. Oyesanya T, Grossberg AL, Okoye GA. Increasing minority representation in the dermatology department: the Johns Hopkins experience. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1133-1134.
  3. Pandya AG, Alexis AF, Berger TG, et al. Increasing racial and ethnic diversity in dermatology: a call to action. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:584-587.
  4. Current trends in medical education. American Association of Medical Colleges. Accessed January 20, 2021. http://www.aamcdiversityfactsandfigures2016.org/report-section/section-3/
  5. Spencer SJ, Logel C, Davies PG. Stereotype threat [published online September 10, 2015]. Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:415-437.
  6. Granstein RD, Cornelius L, Shinkai K. Diversity in dermatology—a call for action. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:499-500.
  7. Pritchett EN, Pandya AG, Ferguson NN, et al. Diversity in dermatology: roadmap for improvement. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79:337-341.
  8. Blake-Beard S, Bayne ML, Crosby FJ, et al. Matching by race and gender in mentoring relationships: keeping our eyes on the prize. J Social Issues. 2011;67:622-643.
Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Page Number
E15-E16
Page Number
E15-E16
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Finding a strong mentor who can both advocate for and help guide a student of color through the admissions process is integral to matching into dermatology
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Article PDF Media

Rural Residency Curricula: Potential Target for Improved Access to Care?

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 03/16/2021 - 08:49

To the Editor:

There is an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice in the United States, leading to growing problems with rural access to care. The provision of rural clinical experiences and telehealth in dermatology residency training might increase the likelihood of trainees establishing a rural practice.

In 2017, the American Academy of Dermatology released an updated statement supporting direct patient access to board-certified dermatologists in an effort to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with skin disease.1 Twenty percent of the US population lives in a rural and medically underserved location, yet these areas remain largely underserved, in part because of an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice.2-4 Successful approaches to improving rural access to dermatology care are poorly defined in the literature.

Several variables have been shown to influence a young physician’s decision to establish a clinical practice in geographically isolated areas, including rural upbringing, longitudinal rural clinical experiences during medical training, and family influences.5 Location of residency training is an additional variable that impacts practice location, though migration following dermatology residency is a complex phenomenon. However, training location does not guarantee retention of dermatology graduates in any particular geographic area.6 Practice incentives and stipends might encourage rural dermatology practice, yet these programs are underfunded. Last, telemedicine in dermatology (including teledermatology and teledermoscopy), though not always an ideal substitute for a live visit, can improve access to care in geographically isolated or underserved areas in general.7-9

Focused recruitment of medical students interested in rural dermatology practice to accredited dermatology residency programs aligned with this goal represents another approach to improve geographic diversity in the field of dermatology. Online access to this information would be useful for both applicants and their mentors.



We assessed viewable online curricula related to rural dermatology and telemedicine experiences at all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited residency programs. Telemedicine experiences at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health systems also were assessed.

Methods

This study was exempt from review by the institutional review board at the University of Minnesota (Minneapolis, Minnesota)(IRB #STUDY00004915) because no human subjects were involved. Online curricula of all ACGME-accredited dermatology residency programs in the United States and Puerto Rico were reviewed from November to December 2018. The following information was recorded: specialized “rural-track” training; optional elective time in rural settings; teledermatology training; and teledermoscopy training.

 

 

Additionally, population density at each program’s primary location was determined using US Census Bureau data and with consideration to communities contained within particular Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)(eTable). Data were obtained from the VHA system to assess teledermatology services at VHA locations affiliated with residency programs.

Results

Of 154 dermatology residency programs identified in the United States and Puerto Rico, 142 were accredited at the time of data collection. Fifteen (10%) were based in communities of 50,000 individuals or fewer that were not near a large metropolitan area. One program (<1%) offered a specific rural track. Fifty-six programs (39%) cited optional rotations or clinical electives, or both, that could be utilized for a rural experience. Eighteen (12%) offered teledermatology experiences and 1 (<1%) offered teledermoscopy during training. Fifty-three programs (37%) offered a rotation at a VHA hospital that had an active teledermatology service.

Comment

Program websites are a free and easily accessible means of acquiring relevant information. The paucity of readily available data on rural dermatology and teledermatology opportunities is unfortunate and a detriment to dermatology residency applicants interested in rural practice, which may result in a missed opportunity to foster a true passion for rural medicine. A brief comment on a website can be impactful, leading to a postgraduate year 4 dermatology elective rotation at a prospective fellowship training site or a rural dermatology experience.

The paucity of dermatologists working directly in rural areas has led to development of teledermatology initiatives to reach deeply into underserved regions. One of the largest providers of teledermatology is the VHA, which standardized its teledermatology efforts in 2012 and provides remarkable educational opportunities for dermatology residents. However, many residency program and VHA websites provide no information about the participation of dermatology residents in the provision of teledermatology services.



A limitation of this study is that it is based on online published curricula. Dermatology residency programs with excellent rural curricula that are not published online might exist.

Residency program directors with an interest in geographic diversity are encouraged to provide rural and teledermatology opportunities and to update these offerings on their websites, which is a simple modifiable strategy that can impact the rural dermatology care gap by recruiting students interested in filling this role. These efforts should be studied to determine whether this strategy impacts resident selection as well as whether focused rural and telemedicine exposure during training increases the likelihood of establishing a rural dermatology practice in the future.

References
  1. American Academy of Dermatology. Position statement on access to specialty care and direct access to dermatologic care. Revised May 20, 2017. Accessed December 13, 2020. https://server.aad.org/forms/Policies/Uploads/PS/PS-Access%20to%20Specialty%20Care%20and%20Direct%20Access%20to%20Dermatologic%20Care.pdf
  2. Dill MJ, Salsberg ES. The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections Through 2025. Center for Workforce Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC); November 2008. Accessed December 13, 2020. http://innovationlabs.com/pa_future/1/background_docs/AAMC%20Complexities%20of%20physician%20demand,%202008.pdf
  3. Glazer AM, Rigel DS. Analysis of trends in geographic distribution of US dermatology workforce density. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:472-473.
  4. Yoo JY, Rigel DS. Trends in dermatology: geographic density of US dermatologists. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:779.
  5. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  6. Landow SM, Oh DH, Weinstock MA. Teledermatology within the Veterans Health Administration, 2002-2014. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:769-773.
  7. Armstrong AW, Kwong MW, Ledo L, et al. Practice models and challenges in teledermatology: a study of collective experiences from teledermatologists. PloS One. 2011;6:e28687.
  8. Lewis H, Becevic M, Myers D, et al. Dermatology ECHO—an innovative solution to address limited access to dermatology expertise. Rural Remote Health. 2018;18:4415.
  9. Edison KE, Dyer JA, Whited JD, et al. Practice gaps. the barriers and the promise of teledermatology. JAMA Dermatol. 2012:148:650-651.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Ms. Streifel is from the University of North Dakota School of Medicine, Grand Forks. Drs. Wessman, Farah, and Gaddis are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Drs. Byrd and Brodell are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson. Dr. Smith is from Carris Health, Willmar, Minnesota.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Cindy Firkins Smith, MD, Carris Health, 101 Willmar Ave SW, Willmar, MN 56201 ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
54-55, E2-E4
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Ms. Streifel is from the University of North Dakota School of Medicine, Grand Forks. Drs. Wessman, Farah, and Gaddis are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Drs. Byrd and Brodell are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson. Dr. Smith is from Carris Health, Willmar, Minnesota.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Cindy Firkins Smith, MD, Carris Health, 101 Willmar Ave SW, Willmar, MN 56201 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

Ms. Streifel is from the University of North Dakota School of Medicine, Grand Forks. Drs. Wessman, Farah, and Gaddis are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Drs. Byrd and Brodell are from the Department of Dermatology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson. Dr. Smith is from Carris Health, Willmar, Minnesota.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

The eTable is available in the Appendix online at www.mdedge.com/dermatology.

Correspondence: Cindy Firkins Smith, MD, Carris Health, 101 Willmar Ave SW, Willmar, MN 56201 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

To the Editor:

There is an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice in the United States, leading to growing problems with rural access to care. The provision of rural clinical experiences and telehealth in dermatology residency training might increase the likelihood of trainees establishing a rural practice.

In 2017, the American Academy of Dermatology released an updated statement supporting direct patient access to board-certified dermatologists in an effort to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with skin disease.1 Twenty percent of the US population lives in a rural and medically underserved location, yet these areas remain largely underserved, in part because of an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice.2-4 Successful approaches to improving rural access to dermatology care are poorly defined in the literature.

Several variables have been shown to influence a young physician’s decision to establish a clinical practice in geographically isolated areas, including rural upbringing, longitudinal rural clinical experiences during medical training, and family influences.5 Location of residency training is an additional variable that impacts practice location, though migration following dermatology residency is a complex phenomenon. However, training location does not guarantee retention of dermatology graduates in any particular geographic area.6 Practice incentives and stipends might encourage rural dermatology practice, yet these programs are underfunded. Last, telemedicine in dermatology (including teledermatology and teledermoscopy), though not always an ideal substitute for a live visit, can improve access to care in geographically isolated or underserved areas in general.7-9

Focused recruitment of medical students interested in rural dermatology practice to accredited dermatology residency programs aligned with this goal represents another approach to improve geographic diversity in the field of dermatology. Online access to this information would be useful for both applicants and their mentors.



We assessed viewable online curricula related to rural dermatology and telemedicine experiences at all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited residency programs. Telemedicine experiences at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health systems also were assessed.

Methods

This study was exempt from review by the institutional review board at the University of Minnesota (Minneapolis, Minnesota)(IRB #STUDY00004915) because no human subjects were involved. Online curricula of all ACGME-accredited dermatology residency programs in the United States and Puerto Rico were reviewed from November to December 2018. The following information was recorded: specialized “rural-track” training; optional elective time in rural settings; teledermatology training; and teledermoscopy training.

 

 

Additionally, population density at each program’s primary location was determined using US Census Bureau data and with consideration to communities contained within particular Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)(eTable). Data were obtained from the VHA system to assess teledermatology services at VHA locations affiliated with residency programs.

Results

Of 154 dermatology residency programs identified in the United States and Puerto Rico, 142 were accredited at the time of data collection. Fifteen (10%) were based in communities of 50,000 individuals or fewer that were not near a large metropolitan area. One program (<1%) offered a specific rural track. Fifty-six programs (39%) cited optional rotations or clinical electives, or both, that could be utilized for a rural experience. Eighteen (12%) offered teledermatology experiences and 1 (<1%) offered teledermoscopy during training. Fifty-three programs (37%) offered a rotation at a VHA hospital that had an active teledermatology service.

Comment

Program websites are a free and easily accessible means of acquiring relevant information. The paucity of readily available data on rural dermatology and teledermatology opportunities is unfortunate and a detriment to dermatology residency applicants interested in rural practice, which may result in a missed opportunity to foster a true passion for rural medicine. A brief comment on a website can be impactful, leading to a postgraduate year 4 dermatology elective rotation at a prospective fellowship training site or a rural dermatology experience.

The paucity of dermatologists working directly in rural areas has led to development of teledermatology initiatives to reach deeply into underserved regions. One of the largest providers of teledermatology is the VHA, which standardized its teledermatology efforts in 2012 and provides remarkable educational opportunities for dermatology residents. However, many residency program and VHA websites provide no information about the participation of dermatology residents in the provision of teledermatology services.



A limitation of this study is that it is based on online published curricula. Dermatology residency programs with excellent rural curricula that are not published online might exist.

Residency program directors with an interest in geographic diversity are encouraged to provide rural and teledermatology opportunities and to update these offerings on their websites, which is a simple modifiable strategy that can impact the rural dermatology care gap by recruiting students interested in filling this role. These efforts should be studied to determine whether this strategy impacts resident selection as well as whether focused rural and telemedicine exposure during training increases the likelihood of establishing a rural dermatology practice in the future.

To the Editor:

There is an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice in the United States, leading to growing problems with rural access to care. The provision of rural clinical experiences and telehealth in dermatology residency training might increase the likelihood of trainees establishing a rural practice.

In 2017, the American Academy of Dermatology released an updated statement supporting direct patient access to board-certified dermatologists in an effort to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with skin disease.1 Twenty percent of the US population lives in a rural and medically underserved location, yet these areas remain largely underserved, in part because of an irrefutable trend toward urban dermatology practice.2-4 Successful approaches to improving rural access to dermatology care are poorly defined in the literature.

Several variables have been shown to influence a young physician’s decision to establish a clinical practice in geographically isolated areas, including rural upbringing, longitudinal rural clinical experiences during medical training, and family influences.5 Location of residency training is an additional variable that impacts practice location, though migration following dermatology residency is a complex phenomenon. However, training location does not guarantee retention of dermatology graduates in any particular geographic area.6 Practice incentives and stipends might encourage rural dermatology practice, yet these programs are underfunded. Last, telemedicine in dermatology (including teledermatology and teledermoscopy), though not always an ideal substitute for a live visit, can improve access to care in geographically isolated or underserved areas in general.7-9

Focused recruitment of medical students interested in rural dermatology practice to accredited dermatology residency programs aligned with this goal represents another approach to improve geographic diversity in the field of dermatology. Online access to this information would be useful for both applicants and their mentors.



We assessed viewable online curricula related to rural dermatology and telemedicine experiences at all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)–accredited residency programs. Telemedicine experiences at Veterans Health Administration (VHA) health systems also were assessed.

Methods

This study was exempt from review by the institutional review board at the University of Minnesota (Minneapolis, Minnesota)(IRB #STUDY00004915) because no human subjects were involved. Online curricula of all ACGME-accredited dermatology residency programs in the United States and Puerto Rico were reviewed from November to December 2018. The following information was recorded: specialized “rural-track” training; optional elective time in rural settings; teledermatology training; and teledermoscopy training.

 

 

Additionally, population density at each program’s primary location was determined using US Census Bureau data and with consideration to communities contained within particular Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs)(eTable). Data were obtained from the VHA system to assess teledermatology services at VHA locations affiliated with residency programs.

Results

Of 154 dermatology residency programs identified in the United States and Puerto Rico, 142 were accredited at the time of data collection. Fifteen (10%) were based in communities of 50,000 individuals or fewer that were not near a large metropolitan area. One program (<1%) offered a specific rural track. Fifty-six programs (39%) cited optional rotations or clinical electives, or both, that could be utilized for a rural experience. Eighteen (12%) offered teledermatology experiences and 1 (<1%) offered teledermoscopy during training. Fifty-three programs (37%) offered a rotation at a VHA hospital that had an active teledermatology service.

Comment

Program websites are a free and easily accessible means of acquiring relevant information. The paucity of readily available data on rural dermatology and teledermatology opportunities is unfortunate and a detriment to dermatology residency applicants interested in rural practice, which may result in a missed opportunity to foster a true passion for rural medicine. A brief comment on a website can be impactful, leading to a postgraduate year 4 dermatology elective rotation at a prospective fellowship training site or a rural dermatology experience.

The paucity of dermatologists working directly in rural areas has led to development of teledermatology initiatives to reach deeply into underserved regions. One of the largest providers of teledermatology is the VHA, which standardized its teledermatology efforts in 2012 and provides remarkable educational opportunities for dermatology residents. However, many residency program and VHA websites provide no information about the participation of dermatology residents in the provision of teledermatology services.



A limitation of this study is that it is based on online published curricula. Dermatology residency programs with excellent rural curricula that are not published online might exist.

Residency program directors with an interest in geographic diversity are encouraged to provide rural and teledermatology opportunities and to update these offerings on their websites, which is a simple modifiable strategy that can impact the rural dermatology care gap by recruiting students interested in filling this role. These efforts should be studied to determine whether this strategy impacts resident selection as well as whether focused rural and telemedicine exposure during training increases the likelihood of establishing a rural dermatology practice in the future.

References
  1. American Academy of Dermatology. Position statement on access to specialty care and direct access to dermatologic care. Revised May 20, 2017. Accessed December 13, 2020. https://server.aad.org/forms/Policies/Uploads/PS/PS-Access%20to%20Specialty%20Care%20and%20Direct%20Access%20to%20Dermatologic%20Care.pdf
  2. Dill MJ, Salsberg ES. The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections Through 2025. Center for Workforce Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC); November 2008. Accessed December 13, 2020. http://innovationlabs.com/pa_future/1/background_docs/AAMC%20Complexities%20of%20physician%20demand,%202008.pdf
  3. Glazer AM, Rigel DS. Analysis of trends in geographic distribution of US dermatology workforce density. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:472-473.
  4. Yoo JY, Rigel DS. Trends in dermatology: geographic density of US dermatologists. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:779.
  5. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  6. Landow SM, Oh DH, Weinstock MA. Teledermatology within the Veterans Health Administration, 2002-2014. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:769-773.
  7. Armstrong AW, Kwong MW, Ledo L, et al. Practice models and challenges in teledermatology: a study of collective experiences from teledermatologists. PloS One. 2011;6:e28687.
  8. Lewis H, Becevic M, Myers D, et al. Dermatology ECHO—an innovative solution to address limited access to dermatology expertise. Rural Remote Health. 2018;18:4415.
  9. Edison KE, Dyer JA, Whited JD, et al. Practice gaps. the barriers and the promise of teledermatology. JAMA Dermatol. 2012:148:650-651.
References
  1. American Academy of Dermatology. Position statement on access to specialty care and direct access to dermatologic care. Revised May 20, 2017. Accessed December 13, 2020. https://server.aad.org/forms/Policies/Uploads/PS/PS-Access%20to%20Specialty%20Care%20and%20Direct%20Access%20to%20Dermatologic%20Care.pdf
  2. Dill MJ, Salsberg ES. The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections Through 2025. Center for Workforce Studies, Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC); November 2008. Accessed December 13, 2020. http://innovationlabs.com/pa_future/1/background_docs/AAMC%20Complexities%20of%20physician%20demand,%202008.pdf
  3. Glazer AM, Rigel DS. Analysis of trends in geographic distribution of US dermatology workforce density. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:472-473.
  4. Yoo JY, Rigel DS. Trends in dermatology: geographic density of US dermatologists. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:779.
  5. Feng H, Berk-Krauss J, Feng PW, et al. Comparison of dermatologist density between urban and rural counties in the United States. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1265-1271.
  6. Landow SM, Oh DH, Weinstock MA. Teledermatology within the Veterans Health Administration, 2002-2014. Telemed J E Health. 2015;21:769-773.
  7. Armstrong AW, Kwong MW, Ledo L, et al. Practice models and challenges in teledermatology: a study of collective experiences from teledermatologists. PloS One. 2011;6:e28687.
  8. Lewis H, Becevic M, Myers D, et al. Dermatology ECHO—an innovative solution to address limited access to dermatology expertise. Rural Remote Health. 2018;18:4415.
  9. Edison KE, Dyer JA, Whited JD, et al. Practice gaps. the barriers and the promise of teledermatology. JAMA Dermatol. 2012:148:650-651.
Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Issue
Cutis - 107(1)
Page Number
54-55, E2-E4
Page Number
54-55, E2-E4
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Practice Points

  • Access to dermatologic care in rural areas is a growing problem.
  • Dermatology residency programs can influence medical students and resident dermatologists to provide care in rural and geographically isolated areas.
  • Presenting detailed curricula that impact access to care on residency program websites could attract applicants with these career goals.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Article PDF Media

Nail Unit Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Updates on Diagnosis, Surgical Approach, and the Use of Mohs Micrographic Surgery

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 11/16/2020 - 22:49

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit. Diagnosis often is delayed due to its clinical presentation mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia. Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion. It is imperative for dermatologists who are early in their training to recognize this entity and refer for treatment. Many approaches have been used to treat NSCC, including wide local excision, digital amputation, cryotherapy, topical modalities, and recently Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). This article provides an overview of the clinical presentation and diagnosis of NSCC, the role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in NSCC pathogenesis, and the evidence supporting surgical management.

NSCC Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit including the nail bed, matrix, groove, and nail fold.1 Although NSCC is the most common malignant nail neoplasm, its diagnosis often is delayed partly due to the clinical presentation of NSCC mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia.2,3 Nail unit SCC most commonly is mistaken for verruca vulgaris, and thus it is important to exclude malignancy in nonresolving verrucae of the fingernails or toenails. Another reason for a delay in the diagnosis is the painless and often asymptomatic presentation of this tumor, which keeps patients from seeking care.4 While evaluating a subungual lesion, dermatologists should keep in mind red flags that would prompt a biopsy to rule out NSCC (Table 1), including chronic nonhealing lesions, nail plate nodularity, known history of infection with HPV types 16 and 18, history of radiation or arsenic exposure, and immunosuppression. Table 2 lists the differential diagnosis of a persisting or nonhealing subungual tumor.

Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion.5 Based on several reports, NSCC more commonly is found in middle-aged and older individuals, has a male predilection, and more often is seen on fingernails than toenails.1,2,6 Figure A shows an example of the clinical presentation of NSCC affecting the right thumb.

A, Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) tumor prior to performing a biopsy. B and C, Histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor showed atypical keratinocytes in the epidermis extending to the dermis (H&E, original magnifications ×30 and ×80). Images courtesy of Adam I. Rubin, MD (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).


Although there often is a delay in the presentation and biopsy of NSCC, no correlation has been observed between time to biopsy and rate of disease invasion and recurrence.7 Nevertheless, Starace et al7 noted that a low threshold for biopsy of nail unit lesions is necessary. It is recommended to perform a deep shave or a nail matrix biopsy, especially if matrical involvement is suspected.8 Patients should be closely followed after a diagnosis of NSCC is made, especially if they are immunocompromised or have genetic skin cancer syndromes, as multiple NSCCs can occur in the same individual.9 For instance, one report discussed a patient with xeroderma pigmentosum who developed 3 separate NSCCs. Interestingly, in this patient, the authors suspected HPV as a cause for the field cancerization, as 2 of 3 NSCCs were noted on initial histopathology to have arisen from verrucae.10

 

 

Histologic Features

A biopsy from an NSCC tumor shows features similar to cutaneous SCC in the affected areas (ie, nail bed, nail matrix, nail groove, nail fold). Characteristic histologic findings include tongues or whorls of atypical squamous epithelium that invade deeply into the dermis.11 The cells appear as atypical keratinocytes, exhibit distinct intracellular bridges, and possess hyperchromatic and pleomorphic nuclei with dyskeratosis and keratin pearls within the dermis.12 Immunoperoxidase staining for cytokeratin AE1/AE3 can be helpful to confirm the diagnosis and assess whether the depth of invasion involves the bone.13 Figures B and C demonstrate the histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor shown in Figure A.

Role of HPV in NSCC Pathogenesis

There is no clear pathogenic etiology for NSCC; however, there have been some reports of HPV as a risk factor. Shimizu et al14 reviewed 136 cases of HPV-associated NSCC and found that half of the cases were associated with high-risk HPV. They also found that 24% of the patients with NSCC had a history of other HPV-associated diseases. As such, the authors hypothesized that there is a possibility for genitodigital HPV transmission and that NSCC could be a reservoir for sexually transmitted high-risk HPV.14 Other risk factors are radiation exposure, chemical insult, and chronic trauma.15 The higher propensity for fingernails likely is reflective of the role of UV light exposure and infection with HPV in the development of these tumors.14,15

Treatment Options for NSCC

Several nonsurgical approaches have been suggested to treat NSCC, including topical agents, cryotherapy, CO2 laser, and photodynamic therapy.3,16 Unfortunately, there are no large case series to demonstrate the cure rate or effectiveness of these methods.17 In one study, the authors did not recommend use of photodynamic therapy or topical modalities such as imiquimod cream 5% or fluorouracil cream 5% as first-line treatments of NSCC due to the difficulty in ensuring complete treatment of the sulci of the lateral and proximal nail folds.18

More evidence in the literature supports surgical approaches, including wide local excision, MMS, and digital amputation. Clinicians should consider relapse rates and the impact on digital functioning when choosing a surgical approach.

For wide local excisions, the most common approach is en bloc excision of the nail unit including the lateral nail folds, the proximal nail fold, and the distal nail fold. The excision starts with a transverse incision on the base of the distal phalanx, which is then prolonged laterally and distally to the distal nail fold down to the bone. After the incision is made to the depth of the bone, the matrical horns are destroyed by electrocoagulation, and the defect is closed either by a full-thickness skin graft or secondary intent.19

Topin-Ruiz et al19 followed patients with biopsy-proven NSCC without bone invasion who underwent en bloc excision followed by full-thickness skin graft. In their consecutive series of 55 patients with 5 years of follow-up, the rate of recurrence was only 4%. There was a low rate of complications including graft infection, delayed wound healing, and severe pain in a small percentage of patients. They also reported a high patient satisfaction rate.19 Due to the low recurrence rate, this study suggested that total excision of the nail unit followed by a full-thickness skin graft is a safe and efficient treatment of NSCC without bone involvement. Similarly, in another case series, wide local excision of the entire nail apparatus had a relapse rate of only 5%, in contrast to partial excision of the nail unit with a relapse of 56%.20 These studies suggest that wide nail unit excision is an acceptable and effective approach; however, in cases in which invasion cannot be ruled out, histologic clearance would be a reasonable approach.21 As such, several case series demonstrated the merits of MMS for NSCC. de Berker et al22 reported 8 patients with NSCC treated using slow MMS and showed tumor clearance after a mean of 3 stages over a mean period of 6.9 days. In all cases, the wounds were allowed to heal by secondary intention, and the distal phalanx was preserved. During a mean follow-up period of 3.1 years, no recurrence was seen, and involved digits remained functional.22

Other studies tested the efficacy of MMS for NSCC. Young et al23 reported the outcomes of 14 NSCC cases treated with MMS. In their case series, they found that the mean number of MMS surgical stages required to achieve histologic clearance was 2, while the mean number of tissue sections was 4.23 All cases were allowed to heal by secondary intent with excellent outcomes, except for 1 patient who received primary closure of a small defect. They reported a 78% cure rate with an average time to recurrence of 47 months.23 In a series of 42 cases of NSCC treated with MMS, Gou et al17 noted a cure rate close to 93%. In their study, recurrences were observed in only 3 patients (7.1%). These recurrent cases were then successfully treated with another round of MMS.17 This study’s cure rate was comparable to the cure rate of MMS for SCC in other cutaneous areas. Goldminz and Bennett24 demonstrated a cure rate of 92% in their case series of 25 patients. Two patients developed recurrent disease and were treated again with MMS resulting in no subsequent recurrence. In this study, the authors allowed all defects to heal by secondary intention and found that there were excellent cosmetic and functional outcomes.24 Dika et al25 evaluated the long-term effectiveness of MMS in the treatment of NSCC, in particular its ability to reduce the number of digital amputations. Fifteen patients diagnosed with NSCC were treated with MMS as the first-line surgical approach and were followed for 2 to 5 years. They found that in utilizing MMS, they were able to avoid amputations in 13 of 15 cases with no recurrence in any of these tumors. Two cases, however, still required amputation of the distal phalanx.25



Although these studies suggest that MMS achieves a high cure rate ranging from 78% to 93%, it is not yet clear in the literature whether MMS is superior to wide local excision. More studies and clinical trials comparing these 2 surgical approaches should be performed to identify which surgical approach would be the gold standard for NSCC and which select cases would benefit from MMS as first-line treatment.

Final Thoughts

Nail unit SCC is one of the most common nail unit malignancies and can mimic several benign entities. Dermatologists who are early in their training should consider biopsy of subungual lesions with certain red flags (Table 1). It is important to diagnose NSCC for early intervention. Referral for wide local excision or MMS would be ideal. There are data in the literature supporting both surgical approaches as being effective; however, there are no trials comparing both approaches. Distal amputation should be considered as a last resort when wide local excision is not reasonable or when MMS fails to achieve clear margins, thereby reducing unnecessary amputations and patient morbidity.17

References
  1. Dika E, Starace M, Patrizi A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a clinical histopathologic study and a proposal for classification. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:365-370.
  2. Lee TM, Jo G, Kim M, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a retrospective review of 19 cases in Asia and comparative review of Western literature. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:428-432.
  3. Tambe SA, Patil PD, Saple DG, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: the great mimicker. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2017;10:59-60.
  4. Perrin C. Tumors of the nail unit. a review. part II: acquired localized longitudinal pachyonychia and masked nail tumors. Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:693-712.
  5. Li PF, Zhu N, Lu H. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: a case report. World J Clin Cases. 2019;7:3590-3594.
  6. Kaul S, Singal A, Grover C, et al. Clinical and histological spectrum of nail psoriasis: a cross-sectional study. J Cutan Pathol. 2018;45:824-830.
  7. Starace M, Alessandrini A, Dika E, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:238-244.
  8. Kelly KJ, Kalani AD, Storrs S, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma of the toe: working toward a standardized therapeutic approach. J Surg Educ. 2008;65:297-301.
  9. Ormerod E, De Berker D. Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma in people with immunosuppression. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173:701-712.
  10. Ventéjou S, Bagny K, Waldmeyer J, et al. Skin cancers in patients of skin phototype V or VI with xeroderma pigmentosum type C (XP-C): a retrospective study. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2019;146:192-203.
  11. Mikhail GR. Subungual epidermoid carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11:291-298.
  12. Lecerf P, Richert B, Theunis A, et al. A retrospective study of squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit diagnosed in a Belgian general hospital over a 15-year period. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:253-261.
  13. Kurokawa I, Senba Y, Kakeda M, et al. Cytokeratin expression in subungual squamous cell carcinoma. J Int Med Res. 2006;34:441-443.
  14. Shimizu A, Kuriyama Y, Hasegawa M, et al. Nail squamous cell carcinoma: a hidden high-risk human papillomavirus reservoir for sexually transmitted infections. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1358-1370.
  15. Tang N, Maloney ME, Clark AH, et al. A retrospective study of nail squamous cell carcinoma at 2 institutions. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42(suppl 1):S8-S17.
  16. An Q, Zheng S, Zhang L, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma treated by topical photodynamic therapy. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020;133:881-882.
  17. Gou D, Nijhawan RI, Srivastava D. Mohs micrographic surgery as the standard of care for nail unit squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:725-732.
  18. Dika E, Fanti PA, Patrizi A, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: 10 years of experience. Dermatol Surg. 2015;41:1015-1019.
  19. Topin-Ruiz S, Surinach C, Dalle S, et al. Surgical treatment of subungual squamous cell carcinoma by wide excision of the nail unit and skin graft reconstruction: an evaluation of treatment efficiency and outcomes. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:442-448.
  20. Dalle S, Depape L, Phan A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail apparatus: clinicopathological study of 35 cases. Br J Dermatol. 2007;156:871-874.
  21. Zaiac MN, Weiss E. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit and squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27:246-251.
  22. de Berker DA, Dahl MG, Malcolm AJ, et al. Micrographic surgery for subungual squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Plast Surg. 1996;49:414-419.
  23. Young LC, Tuxen AJ, Goodman G. Mohs’ micrographic surgery as treatment for squamous dysplasia of the nail unit. Australas J Dermatol. 2012;53:123-127.
  24. Goldminz D, Bennett RG. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18:721-726.
  25. Dika E, Piraccini BM, Balestri R, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail: report of 15 cases. our experience and a long-term follow-up. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:1310-1314.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Mohammed Dany, MD, PhD, 3600 Spruce St, 2 Maloney, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 106(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E11-E14
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Mohammed Dany, MD, PhD, 3600 Spruce St, 2 Maloney, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Mohammed Dany, MD, PhD, 3600 Spruce St, 2 Maloney, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit. Diagnosis often is delayed due to its clinical presentation mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia. Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion. It is imperative for dermatologists who are early in their training to recognize this entity and refer for treatment. Many approaches have been used to treat NSCC, including wide local excision, digital amputation, cryotherapy, topical modalities, and recently Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). This article provides an overview of the clinical presentation and diagnosis of NSCC, the role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in NSCC pathogenesis, and the evidence supporting surgical management.

NSCC Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit including the nail bed, matrix, groove, and nail fold.1 Although NSCC is the most common malignant nail neoplasm, its diagnosis often is delayed partly due to the clinical presentation of NSCC mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia.2,3 Nail unit SCC most commonly is mistaken for verruca vulgaris, and thus it is important to exclude malignancy in nonresolving verrucae of the fingernails or toenails. Another reason for a delay in the diagnosis is the painless and often asymptomatic presentation of this tumor, which keeps patients from seeking care.4 While evaluating a subungual lesion, dermatologists should keep in mind red flags that would prompt a biopsy to rule out NSCC (Table 1), including chronic nonhealing lesions, nail plate nodularity, known history of infection with HPV types 16 and 18, history of radiation or arsenic exposure, and immunosuppression. Table 2 lists the differential diagnosis of a persisting or nonhealing subungual tumor.

Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion.5 Based on several reports, NSCC more commonly is found in middle-aged and older individuals, has a male predilection, and more often is seen on fingernails than toenails.1,2,6 Figure A shows an example of the clinical presentation of NSCC affecting the right thumb.

A, Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) tumor prior to performing a biopsy. B and C, Histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor showed atypical keratinocytes in the epidermis extending to the dermis (H&E, original magnifications ×30 and ×80). Images courtesy of Adam I. Rubin, MD (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).


Although there often is a delay in the presentation and biopsy of NSCC, no correlation has been observed between time to biopsy and rate of disease invasion and recurrence.7 Nevertheless, Starace et al7 noted that a low threshold for biopsy of nail unit lesions is necessary. It is recommended to perform a deep shave or a nail matrix biopsy, especially if matrical involvement is suspected.8 Patients should be closely followed after a diagnosis of NSCC is made, especially if they are immunocompromised or have genetic skin cancer syndromes, as multiple NSCCs can occur in the same individual.9 For instance, one report discussed a patient with xeroderma pigmentosum who developed 3 separate NSCCs. Interestingly, in this patient, the authors suspected HPV as a cause for the field cancerization, as 2 of 3 NSCCs were noted on initial histopathology to have arisen from verrucae.10

 

 

Histologic Features

A biopsy from an NSCC tumor shows features similar to cutaneous SCC in the affected areas (ie, nail bed, nail matrix, nail groove, nail fold). Characteristic histologic findings include tongues or whorls of atypical squamous epithelium that invade deeply into the dermis.11 The cells appear as atypical keratinocytes, exhibit distinct intracellular bridges, and possess hyperchromatic and pleomorphic nuclei with dyskeratosis and keratin pearls within the dermis.12 Immunoperoxidase staining for cytokeratin AE1/AE3 can be helpful to confirm the diagnosis and assess whether the depth of invasion involves the bone.13 Figures B and C demonstrate the histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor shown in Figure A.

Role of HPV in NSCC Pathogenesis

There is no clear pathogenic etiology for NSCC; however, there have been some reports of HPV as a risk factor. Shimizu et al14 reviewed 136 cases of HPV-associated NSCC and found that half of the cases were associated with high-risk HPV. They also found that 24% of the patients with NSCC had a history of other HPV-associated diseases. As such, the authors hypothesized that there is a possibility for genitodigital HPV transmission and that NSCC could be a reservoir for sexually transmitted high-risk HPV.14 Other risk factors are radiation exposure, chemical insult, and chronic trauma.15 The higher propensity for fingernails likely is reflective of the role of UV light exposure and infection with HPV in the development of these tumors.14,15

Treatment Options for NSCC

Several nonsurgical approaches have been suggested to treat NSCC, including topical agents, cryotherapy, CO2 laser, and photodynamic therapy.3,16 Unfortunately, there are no large case series to demonstrate the cure rate or effectiveness of these methods.17 In one study, the authors did not recommend use of photodynamic therapy or topical modalities such as imiquimod cream 5% or fluorouracil cream 5% as first-line treatments of NSCC due to the difficulty in ensuring complete treatment of the sulci of the lateral and proximal nail folds.18

More evidence in the literature supports surgical approaches, including wide local excision, MMS, and digital amputation. Clinicians should consider relapse rates and the impact on digital functioning when choosing a surgical approach.

For wide local excisions, the most common approach is en bloc excision of the nail unit including the lateral nail folds, the proximal nail fold, and the distal nail fold. The excision starts with a transverse incision on the base of the distal phalanx, which is then prolonged laterally and distally to the distal nail fold down to the bone. After the incision is made to the depth of the bone, the matrical horns are destroyed by electrocoagulation, and the defect is closed either by a full-thickness skin graft or secondary intent.19

Topin-Ruiz et al19 followed patients with biopsy-proven NSCC without bone invasion who underwent en bloc excision followed by full-thickness skin graft. In their consecutive series of 55 patients with 5 years of follow-up, the rate of recurrence was only 4%. There was a low rate of complications including graft infection, delayed wound healing, and severe pain in a small percentage of patients. They also reported a high patient satisfaction rate.19 Due to the low recurrence rate, this study suggested that total excision of the nail unit followed by a full-thickness skin graft is a safe and efficient treatment of NSCC without bone involvement. Similarly, in another case series, wide local excision of the entire nail apparatus had a relapse rate of only 5%, in contrast to partial excision of the nail unit with a relapse of 56%.20 These studies suggest that wide nail unit excision is an acceptable and effective approach; however, in cases in which invasion cannot be ruled out, histologic clearance would be a reasonable approach.21 As such, several case series demonstrated the merits of MMS for NSCC. de Berker et al22 reported 8 patients with NSCC treated using slow MMS and showed tumor clearance after a mean of 3 stages over a mean period of 6.9 days. In all cases, the wounds were allowed to heal by secondary intention, and the distal phalanx was preserved. During a mean follow-up period of 3.1 years, no recurrence was seen, and involved digits remained functional.22

Other studies tested the efficacy of MMS for NSCC. Young et al23 reported the outcomes of 14 NSCC cases treated with MMS. In their case series, they found that the mean number of MMS surgical stages required to achieve histologic clearance was 2, while the mean number of tissue sections was 4.23 All cases were allowed to heal by secondary intent with excellent outcomes, except for 1 patient who received primary closure of a small defect. They reported a 78% cure rate with an average time to recurrence of 47 months.23 In a series of 42 cases of NSCC treated with MMS, Gou et al17 noted a cure rate close to 93%. In their study, recurrences were observed in only 3 patients (7.1%). These recurrent cases were then successfully treated with another round of MMS.17 This study’s cure rate was comparable to the cure rate of MMS for SCC in other cutaneous areas. Goldminz and Bennett24 demonstrated a cure rate of 92% in their case series of 25 patients. Two patients developed recurrent disease and were treated again with MMS resulting in no subsequent recurrence. In this study, the authors allowed all defects to heal by secondary intention and found that there were excellent cosmetic and functional outcomes.24 Dika et al25 evaluated the long-term effectiveness of MMS in the treatment of NSCC, in particular its ability to reduce the number of digital amputations. Fifteen patients diagnosed with NSCC were treated with MMS as the first-line surgical approach and were followed for 2 to 5 years. They found that in utilizing MMS, they were able to avoid amputations in 13 of 15 cases with no recurrence in any of these tumors. Two cases, however, still required amputation of the distal phalanx.25



Although these studies suggest that MMS achieves a high cure rate ranging from 78% to 93%, it is not yet clear in the literature whether MMS is superior to wide local excision. More studies and clinical trials comparing these 2 surgical approaches should be performed to identify which surgical approach would be the gold standard for NSCC and which select cases would benefit from MMS as first-line treatment.

Final Thoughts

Nail unit SCC is one of the most common nail unit malignancies and can mimic several benign entities. Dermatologists who are early in their training should consider biopsy of subungual lesions with certain red flags (Table 1). It is important to diagnose NSCC for early intervention. Referral for wide local excision or MMS would be ideal. There are data in the literature supporting both surgical approaches as being effective; however, there are no trials comparing both approaches. Distal amputation should be considered as a last resort when wide local excision is not reasonable or when MMS fails to achieve clear margins, thereby reducing unnecessary amputations and patient morbidity.17

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit. Diagnosis often is delayed due to its clinical presentation mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia. Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion. It is imperative for dermatologists who are early in their training to recognize this entity and refer for treatment. Many approaches have been used to treat NSCC, including wide local excision, digital amputation, cryotherapy, topical modalities, and recently Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). This article provides an overview of the clinical presentation and diagnosis of NSCC, the role of human papillomavirus (HPV) in NSCC pathogenesis, and the evidence supporting surgical management.

NSCC Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis

Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma is a malignant neoplasm that can arise from any part of the nail unit including the nail bed, matrix, groove, and nail fold.1 Although NSCC is the most common malignant nail neoplasm, its diagnosis often is delayed partly due to the clinical presentation of NSCC mimicking benign conditions such as onychomycosis, warts, and paronychia.2,3 Nail unit SCC most commonly is mistaken for verruca vulgaris, and thus it is important to exclude malignancy in nonresolving verrucae of the fingernails or toenails. Another reason for a delay in the diagnosis is the painless and often asymptomatic presentation of this tumor, which keeps patients from seeking care.4 While evaluating a subungual lesion, dermatologists should keep in mind red flags that would prompt a biopsy to rule out NSCC (Table 1), including chronic nonhealing lesions, nail plate nodularity, known history of infection with HPV types 16 and 18, history of radiation or arsenic exposure, and immunosuppression. Table 2 lists the differential diagnosis of a persisting or nonhealing subungual tumor.

Nail unit SCC has a low rate of metastasis; however, a delayed diagnosis often can result in local destruction and bone invasion.5 Based on several reports, NSCC more commonly is found in middle-aged and older individuals, has a male predilection, and more often is seen on fingernails than toenails.1,2,6 Figure A shows an example of the clinical presentation of NSCC affecting the right thumb.

A, Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) tumor prior to performing a biopsy. B and C, Histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor showed atypical keratinocytes in the epidermis extending to the dermis (H&E, original magnifications ×30 and ×80). Images courtesy of Adam I. Rubin, MD (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania).


Although there often is a delay in the presentation and biopsy of NSCC, no correlation has been observed between time to biopsy and rate of disease invasion and recurrence.7 Nevertheless, Starace et al7 noted that a low threshold for biopsy of nail unit lesions is necessary. It is recommended to perform a deep shave or a nail matrix biopsy, especially if matrical involvement is suspected.8 Patients should be closely followed after a diagnosis of NSCC is made, especially if they are immunocompromised or have genetic skin cancer syndromes, as multiple NSCCs can occur in the same individual.9 For instance, one report discussed a patient with xeroderma pigmentosum who developed 3 separate NSCCs. Interestingly, in this patient, the authors suspected HPV as a cause for the field cancerization, as 2 of 3 NSCCs were noted on initial histopathology to have arisen from verrucae.10

 

 

Histologic Features

A biopsy from an NSCC tumor shows features similar to cutaneous SCC in the affected areas (ie, nail bed, nail matrix, nail groove, nail fold). Characteristic histologic findings include tongues or whorls of atypical squamous epithelium that invade deeply into the dermis.11 The cells appear as atypical keratinocytes, exhibit distinct intracellular bridges, and possess hyperchromatic and pleomorphic nuclei with dyskeratosis and keratin pearls within the dermis.12 Immunoperoxidase staining for cytokeratin AE1/AE3 can be helpful to confirm the diagnosis and assess whether the depth of invasion involves the bone.13 Figures B and C demonstrate the histopathology of NSCC biopsied from the tumor shown in Figure A.

Role of HPV in NSCC Pathogenesis

There is no clear pathogenic etiology for NSCC; however, there have been some reports of HPV as a risk factor. Shimizu et al14 reviewed 136 cases of HPV-associated NSCC and found that half of the cases were associated with high-risk HPV. They also found that 24% of the patients with NSCC had a history of other HPV-associated diseases. As such, the authors hypothesized that there is a possibility for genitodigital HPV transmission and that NSCC could be a reservoir for sexually transmitted high-risk HPV.14 Other risk factors are radiation exposure, chemical insult, and chronic trauma.15 The higher propensity for fingernails likely is reflective of the role of UV light exposure and infection with HPV in the development of these tumors.14,15

Treatment Options for NSCC

Several nonsurgical approaches have been suggested to treat NSCC, including topical agents, cryotherapy, CO2 laser, and photodynamic therapy.3,16 Unfortunately, there are no large case series to demonstrate the cure rate or effectiveness of these methods.17 In one study, the authors did not recommend use of photodynamic therapy or topical modalities such as imiquimod cream 5% or fluorouracil cream 5% as first-line treatments of NSCC due to the difficulty in ensuring complete treatment of the sulci of the lateral and proximal nail folds.18

More evidence in the literature supports surgical approaches, including wide local excision, MMS, and digital amputation. Clinicians should consider relapse rates and the impact on digital functioning when choosing a surgical approach.

For wide local excisions, the most common approach is en bloc excision of the nail unit including the lateral nail folds, the proximal nail fold, and the distal nail fold. The excision starts with a transverse incision on the base of the distal phalanx, which is then prolonged laterally and distally to the distal nail fold down to the bone. After the incision is made to the depth of the bone, the matrical horns are destroyed by electrocoagulation, and the defect is closed either by a full-thickness skin graft or secondary intent.19

Topin-Ruiz et al19 followed patients with biopsy-proven NSCC without bone invasion who underwent en bloc excision followed by full-thickness skin graft. In their consecutive series of 55 patients with 5 years of follow-up, the rate of recurrence was only 4%. There was a low rate of complications including graft infection, delayed wound healing, and severe pain in a small percentage of patients. They also reported a high patient satisfaction rate.19 Due to the low recurrence rate, this study suggested that total excision of the nail unit followed by a full-thickness skin graft is a safe and efficient treatment of NSCC without bone involvement. Similarly, in another case series, wide local excision of the entire nail apparatus had a relapse rate of only 5%, in contrast to partial excision of the nail unit with a relapse of 56%.20 These studies suggest that wide nail unit excision is an acceptable and effective approach; however, in cases in which invasion cannot be ruled out, histologic clearance would be a reasonable approach.21 As such, several case series demonstrated the merits of MMS for NSCC. de Berker et al22 reported 8 patients with NSCC treated using slow MMS and showed tumor clearance after a mean of 3 stages over a mean period of 6.9 days. In all cases, the wounds were allowed to heal by secondary intention, and the distal phalanx was preserved. During a mean follow-up period of 3.1 years, no recurrence was seen, and involved digits remained functional.22

Other studies tested the efficacy of MMS for NSCC. Young et al23 reported the outcomes of 14 NSCC cases treated with MMS. In their case series, they found that the mean number of MMS surgical stages required to achieve histologic clearance was 2, while the mean number of tissue sections was 4.23 All cases were allowed to heal by secondary intent with excellent outcomes, except for 1 patient who received primary closure of a small defect. They reported a 78% cure rate with an average time to recurrence of 47 months.23 In a series of 42 cases of NSCC treated with MMS, Gou et al17 noted a cure rate close to 93%. In their study, recurrences were observed in only 3 patients (7.1%). These recurrent cases were then successfully treated with another round of MMS.17 This study’s cure rate was comparable to the cure rate of MMS for SCC in other cutaneous areas. Goldminz and Bennett24 demonstrated a cure rate of 92% in their case series of 25 patients. Two patients developed recurrent disease and were treated again with MMS resulting in no subsequent recurrence. In this study, the authors allowed all defects to heal by secondary intention and found that there were excellent cosmetic and functional outcomes.24 Dika et al25 evaluated the long-term effectiveness of MMS in the treatment of NSCC, in particular its ability to reduce the number of digital amputations. Fifteen patients diagnosed with NSCC were treated with MMS as the first-line surgical approach and were followed for 2 to 5 years. They found that in utilizing MMS, they were able to avoid amputations in 13 of 15 cases with no recurrence in any of these tumors. Two cases, however, still required amputation of the distal phalanx.25



Although these studies suggest that MMS achieves a high cure rate ranging from 78% to 93%, it is not yet clear in the literature whether MMS is superior to wide local excision. More studies and clinical trials comparing these 2 surgical approaches should be performed to identify which surgical approach would be the gold standard for NSCC and which select cases would benefit from MMS as first-line treatment.

Final Thoughts

Nail unit SCC is one of the most common nail unit malignancies and can mimic several benign entities. Dermatologists who are early in their training should consider biopsy of subungual lesions with certain red flags (Table 1). It is important to diagnose NSCC for early intervention. Referral for wide local excision or MMS would be ideal. There are data in the literature supporting both surgical approaches as being effective; however, there are no trials comparing both approaches. Distal amputation should be considered as a last resort when wide local excision is not reasonable or when MMS fails to achieve clear margins, thereby reducing unnecessary amputations and patient morbidity.17

References
  1. Dika E, Starace M, Patrizi A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a clinical histopathologic study and a proposal for classification. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:365-370.
  2. Lee TM, Jo G, Kim M, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a retrospective review of 19 cases in Asia and comparative review of Western literature. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:428-432.
  3. Tambe SA, Patil PD, Saple DG, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: the great mimicker. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2017;10:59-60.
  4. Perrin C. Tumors of the nail unit. a review. part II: acquired localized longitudinal pachyonychia and masked nail tumors. Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:693-712.
  5. Li PF, Zhu N, Lu H. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: a case report. World J Clin Cases. 2019;7:3590-3594.
  6. Kaul S, Singal A, Grover C, et al. Clinical and histological spectrum of nail psoriasis: a cross-sectional study. J Cutan Pathol. 2018;45:824-830.
  7. Starace M, Alessandrini A, Dika E, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:238-244.
  8. Kelly KJ, Kalani AD, Storrs S, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma of the toe: working toward a standardized therapeutic approach. J Surg Educ. 2008;65:297-301.
  9. Ormerod E, De Berker D. Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma in people with immunosuppression. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173:701-712.
  10. Ventéjou S, Bagny K, Waldmeyer J, et al. Skin cancers in patients of skin phototype V or VI with xeroderma pigmentosum type C (XP-C): a retrospective study. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2019;146:192-203.
  11. Mikhail GR. Subungual epidermoid carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11:291-298.
  12. Lecerf P, Richert B, Theunis A, et al. A retrospective study of squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit diagnosed in a Belgian general hospital over a 15-year period. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:253-261.
  13. Kurokawa I, Senba Y, Kakeda M, et al. Cytokeratin expression in subungual squamous cell carcinoma. J Int Med Res. 2006;34:441-443.
  14. Shimizu A, Kuriyama Y, Hasegawa M, et al. Nail squamous cell carcinoma: a hidden high-risk human papillomavirus reservoir for sexually transmitted infections. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1358-1370.
  15. Tang N, Maloney ME, Clark AH, et al. A retrospective study of nail squamous cell carcinoma at 2 institutions. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42(suppl 1):S8-S17.
  16. An Q, Zheng S, Zhang L, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma treated by topical photodynamic therapy. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020;133:881-882.
  17. Gou D, Nijhawan RI, Srivastava D. Mohs micrographic surgery as the standard of care for nail unit squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:725-732.
  18. Dika E, Fanti PA, Patrizi A, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: 10 years of experience. Dermatol Surg. 2015;41:1015-1019.
  19. Topin-Ruiz S, Surinach C, Dalle S, et al. Surgical treatment of subungual squamous cell carcinoma by wide excision of the nail unit and skin graft reconstruction: an evaluation of treatment efficiency and outcomes. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:442-448.
  20. Dalle S, Depape L, Phan A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail apparatus: clinicopathological study of 35 cases. Br J Dermatol. 2007;156:871-874.
  21. Zaiac MN, Weiss E. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit and squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27:246-251.
  22. de Berker DA, Dahl MG, Malcolm AJ, et al. Micrographic surgery for subungual squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Plast Surg. 1996;49:414-419.
  23. Young LC, Tuxen AJ, Goodman G. Mohs’ micrographic surgery as treatment for squamous dysplasia of the nail unit. Australas J Dermatol. 2012;53:123-127.
  24. Goldminz D, Bennett RG. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18:721-726.
  25. Dika E, Piraccini BM, Balestri R, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail: report of 15 cases. our experience and a long-term follow-up. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:1310-1314.
References
  1. Dika E, Starace M, Patrizi A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a clinical histopathologic study and a proposal for classification. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:365-370.
  2. Lee TM, Jo G, Kim M, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: a retrospective review of 19 cases in Asia and comparative review of Western literature. Int J Dermatol. 2019;58:428-432.
  3. Tambe SA, Patil PD, Saple DG, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: the great mimicker. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2017;10:59-60.
  4. Perrin C. Tumors of the nail unit. a review. part II: acquired localized longitudinal pachyonychia and masked nail tumors. Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:693-712.
  5. Li PF, Zhu N, Lu H. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail bed: a case report. World J Clin Cases. 2019;7:3590-3594.
  6. Kaul S, Singal A, Grover C, et al. Clinical and histological spectrum of nail psoriasis: a cross-sectional study. J Cutan Pathol. 2018;45:824-830.
  7. Starace M, Alessandrini A, Dika E, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2018;8:238-244.
  8. Kelly KJ, Kalani AD, Storrs S, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma of the toe: working toward a standardized therapeutic approach. J Surg Educ. 2008;65:297-301.
  9. Ormerod E, De Berker D. Nail unit squamous cell carcinoma in people with immunosuppression. Br J Dermatol. 2015;173:701-712.
  10. Ventéjou S, Bagny K, Waldmeyer J, et al. Skin cancers in patients of skin phototype V or VI with xeroderma pigmentosum type C (XP-C): a retrospective study. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2019;146:192-203.
  11. Mikhail GR. Subungual epidermoid carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11:291-298.
  12. Lecerf P, Richert B, Theunis A, et al. A retrospective study of squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit diagnosed in a Belgian general hospital over a 15-year period. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:253-261.
  13. Kurokawa I, Senba Y, Kakeda M, et al. Cytokeratin expression in subungual squamous cell carcinoma. J Int Med Res. 2006;34:441-443.
  14. Shimizu A, Kuriyama Y, Hasegawa M, et al. Nail squamous cell carcinoma: a hidden high-risk human papillomavirus reservoir for sexually transmitted infections. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1358-1370.
  15. Tang N, Maloney ME, Clark AH, et al. A retrospective study of nail squamous cell carcinoma at 2 institutions. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42(suppl 1):S8-S17.
  16. An Q, Zheng S, Zhang L, et al. Subungual squamous cell carcinoma treated by topical photodynamic therapy. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020;133:881-882.
  17. Gou D, Nijhawan RI, Srivastava D. Mohs micrographic surgery as the standard of care for nail unit squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:725-732.
  18. Dika E, Fanti PA, Patrizi A, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail unit: 10 years of experience. Dermatol Surg. 2015;41:1015-1019.
  19. Topin-Ruiz S, Surinach C, Dalle S, et al. Surgical treatment of subungual squamous cell carcinoma by wide excision of the nail unit and skin graft reconstruction: an evaluation of treatment efficiency and outcomes. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:442-448.
  20. Dalle S, Depape L, Phan A, et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the nail apparatus: clinicopathological study of 35 cases. Br J Dermatol. 2007;156:871-874.
  21. Zaiac MN, Weiss E. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit and squamous cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27:246-251.
  22. de Berker DA, Dahl MG, Malcolm AJ, et al. Micrographic surgery for subungual squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Plast Surg. 1996;49:414-419.
  23. Young LC, Tuxen AJ, Goodman G. Mohs’ micrographic surgery as treatment for squamous dysplasia of the nail unit. Australas J Dermatol. 2012;53:123-127.
  24. Goldminz D, Bennett RG. Mohs micrographic surgery of the nail unit. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992;18:721-726.
  25. Dika E, Piraccini BM, Balestri R, et al. Mohs surgery for squamous cell carcinoma of the nail: report of 15 cases. our experience and a long-term follow-up. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:1310-1314.
Issue
Cutis - 106(5)
Issue
Cutis - 106(5)
Page Number
E11-E14
Page Number
E11-E14
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearls

  • The diagnosis of nail unit squamous cell carcinoma often is delayed due to its clinical presentation, which frequently mimics benign nail conditions.
  • Treatment includes wide local excision, Mohs micrographic surgery, digital amputation, cryotherapy, and topical modalities.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Article PDF Media