Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin

Applications for the CUTIS 2023 Resident Corner Column

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/21/2022 - 11:49
Display Headline
Applications for the CUTIS 2023 Resident Corner Column

The Cutis Editorial Board is now accepting applications for the 2023 Resident Corner column. The Editorial Board will select 2 to 3 residents to serve as the Resident Corner columnists for 1 year. Articles are posted online only at www.mdedge.com/dermatology but will be referenced in Index Medicus. All applicants must be current residents and will be in residency throughout 2023.

For consideration, send your curriculum vitae along with a brief (not to exceed 500 words) statement of why you enjoy Cutis and what you can offer your fellow residents in contributing a monthly column.

A signed letter of recommendation from the Director of the dermatology residency program also should be supplied.

All materials should be submitted via email to Melissa Sears (msears@mdedge.com) by October 28. The residents who are selected to write the column for the upcoming year will be notified by November 4.

We look forward to continuing to educate dermatology residents on topics that are most important to them!

Publications
Topics
Sections

The Cutis Editorial Board is now accepting applications for the 2023 Resident Corner column. The Editorial Board will select 2 to 3 residents to serve as the Resident Corner columnists for 1 year. Articles are posted online only at www.mdedge.com/dermatology but will be referenced in Index Medicus. All applicants must be current residents and will be in residency throughout 2023.

For consideration, send your curriculum vitae along with a brief (not to exceed 500 words) statement of why you enjoy Cutis and what you can offer your fellow residents in contributing a monthly column.

A signed letter of recommendation from the Director of the dermatology residency program also should be supplied.

All materials should be submitted via email to Melissa Sears (msears@mdedge.com) by October 28. The residents who are selected to write the column for the upcoming year will be notified by November 4.

We look forward to continuing to educate dermatology residents on topics that are most important to them!

The Cutis Editorial Board is now accepting applications for the 2023 Resident Corner column. The Editorial Board will select 2 to 3 residents to serve as the Resident Corner columnists for 1 year. Articles are posted online only at www.mdedge.com/dermatology but will be referenced in Index Medicus. All applicants must be current residents and will be in residency throughout 2023.

For consideration, send your curriculum vitae along with a brief (not to exceed 500 words) statement of why you enjoy Cutis and what you can offer your fellow residents in contributing a monthly column.

A signed letter of recommendation from the Director of the dermatology residency program also should be supplied.

All materials should be submitted via email to Melissa Sears (msears@mdedge.com) by October 28. The residents who are selected to write the column for the upcoming year will be notified by November 4.

We look forward to continuing to educate dermatology residents on topics that are most important to them!

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Applications for the CUTIS 2023 Resident Corner Column
Display Headline
Applications for the CUTIS 2023 Resident Corner Column
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Thu, 07/18/2019 - 11:45
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 07/18/2019 - 11:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 07/18/2019 - 11:45
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

The impact of COVID-19 on adolescents’ mental health

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/01/2022 - 12:15
Display Headline
The impact of COVID-19 on adolescents’ mental health

While the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the mental health of a wide range of individuals, its adverse effects have been particularly detrimental to adolescents. In this article, I discuss evidence that shows the effects of the pandemic on adolescent patients, potential reasons for this increased distress, and what types of coping mechanisms adolescents have used to counter these effects.

Increases in multiple measures of psychopathology

Multiple online surveys and other studies have documented the pandemic’s impact on younger individuals. In the United States, visits to emergency departments by pediatric patients increased in the months after the first lockdown period.1 Several studies found increased rates of anxiety and depression among adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic.2,3 In an online survey of 359 children and 3,254 adolescents in China, 22% of respondents reported that they experienced depressive symptoms.3 In an online survey of 1,054 Canadian adolescents, 43% said they were “very concerned” about the pandemic.4 In an online survey of 7,353 adolescents in the United States, 37% reported suicidal ideation during the pandemic compared to 17% in 2017.5 A Chinese study found that smartphone and internet addiction was significantly associated with increased levels of depressive symptoms during the pandemic.3 In a survey in the Philippines, 16.3% of adolescents reported moderate-to-severe psychological impairment during the pandemic; the rates of COVID-19–related anxiety were higher among girls vs boys.6 Alcohol and cannabis use increased among Canadian adolescents during the pandemic, according to an online survey.7 Adolescents with anorexia nervosa reported a 70% increase in poor eating habits and more thoughts associated with eating disorders during the pandemic.8 A Danish study found that children and adolescents newly diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or who had completed treatment exhibited worsening OCD, anxiety, and depressive symptoms during the pandemic.9 An online survey of 6,196 Chinese adolescents found that those with a higher number of pre-pandemic adverse childhood experiences, such as abuse and neglect, had elevated posttraumatic stress symptoms and anxiety during the onset of the pandemic.10

Underlying causes of pandemic-induced distress

Limited social connectedness during the pandemic is a major reason for distress among adolescents. A review of 80 studies found that social isolation and loneliness as a result of social distancing and quarantining were associated with an increased risk of depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and self-harm.11 Parents’ stress about the risks of COVID-19 was correlated with worsening mental health in their adolescent children.12 A Chinese study found that the amount of time students spent on smartphones and social media doubled during the pandemic.13 In an online survey of 7,890 Chinese adolescents, greater social media, internet, and smartphone use was associated with increased anxiety and depression.14 This may be in part the result of adolescents spending time reading COVID-related news.

Coping mechanisms to increase well-being

Researchers have identified several positive coping mechanisms adolescents employed during the pandemic. Although some data suggest that increased internet use raises the risk of COVID-related distress, for certain adolescents, using social media to stay connected with friends and relatives was a buffer for feelings of loneliness and might have increased mental well-being.15 Other common coping mechanisms include relying on faith, volunteering, and starting new hobbies.16 During the pandemic, there were higher rates of playing outside and increased physical activity, which correlated with positive mental health outcomes.16 An online survey of 1,040 adolescents found that those who looked to the future optimistically and confidently had a higher health-related quality of life.17

Continuing an emphasis on adolescent well-being

Although data are limited, adolescents can continue to use these coping mechanisms to maintain their well-being, even if COVID-related restrictions are lifted or reimplemented. During these difficult times, it is imperative for adolescents to get the mental health services they need, and for psychiatric clinicians to continue to find avenues to promote resilience and mental wellness among young patients.

References

1. Leeb RT, Bitsko RH, Radhakrishnan L, et al. Mental health–related emergency department visits among children aged <18 years during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, January 1-October 17, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(45):1675-1680. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a3
2. Oosterhoff B, Palmer CA, Wilson J, et al. Adolescents’ motivations to engage in social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: associations with mental and social health. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(2):179-185. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.004
3. Duan L, Shao X, Wang Y, et al. An investigation of mental health status of children and adolescents in China during the outbreak of COVID-19. J Affect Disord. 2020;275:112-118. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.06.029
4. Ellis WE, Dumas TM, Forbes LM. Physically isolated but socially connected: psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Can J Behav Sci. 2020;52(3):177-187. doi:10.1037/cbs0000215
5. Murata S, Rezeppa T, Thoma B, et al. The psychiatric sequelae of the COVID-19 pandemic in adolescents, adults, and health care workers. Depress Anxiety. 2021;38(2):233-246. doi:10.1002/da.23120
6. Tee ML, Tee CA, Anlacan JP, et al. Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines. J Affect Disord. 2020;277:379-391. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.043
7. Dumas TM, Ellis W, Litt DM. What does adolescent substance use look like during the COVID-19 pandemic? Examining changes in frequency, social contexts, and pandemic-related predictors. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(3):354-361. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.06.018
8. Schlegl S, Maier J, Meule A, et al. Eating disorders in times of the COVID-19 pandemic—results from an online survey of patients with anorexia nervosa. Int J Eat Disord. 2020;53:1791-1800. doi:10.1002/eat.23374.
9. Nissen JB, Højgaard D, Thomsen PH. The immediate effect of COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents with obsessive compulsive disorder. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20(1):511. doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02905-5
10. Guo J, Fu M, Liu D, et al. Is the psychological impact of exposure to COVID-19 stronger in adolescents with pre-pandemic maltreatment experiences? A survey of rural Chinese adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 2020;110(Pt 2):104667. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104667
11. Loades ME, Chatburn E, Higson-Sweeney N, et al. Rapid Systematic Review: The impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(11):1218-1239.e3. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.05.009
12. Spinelli M, Lionetti F, Setti A, et al. Parenting stress during the COVID-19 outbreak: socioeconomic and environmental risk factors and implications for children emotion regulation. Fam Process. 2021;60(2):639-653. doi:10.1111/famp.12601
13. Chen IH, Chen CY, Pakpour AH, et al. Internet-related behaviors and psychological distress among schoolchildren during COVID-19 school suspension. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(10):1099-1102.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.06.007
14. Li W, Zhang Y, Wang J, et al. Association of home quarantine and mental health among teenagers in Wuhan, China, during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(3):313-316. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.5499
15. Janssen, LHC, Kullberg, MJ, Verkuil B, et al. Does the COVID-19 pandemic impact parents’ and adolescents’ well-being? An EMA-study on daily affect and parenting. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240962. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240962
16. Banati P, Jones N, Youssef S. Intersecting vulnerabilities: the impacts of COVID-19 on the psycho-emotional lives of young people in low- and middle-income countries. Eur J Dev Res. 2020;32(5):1613-1638. doi:10.1057/s41287-020-00325-5
17. Ravens-Sieberer U, Kaman A, Otto C, et al. Mental health and quality of life in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic—results of the COPSY study. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020;117(48):828-829. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2020.0828

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Malik is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1-e2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Malik is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Malik is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

While the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the mental health of a wide range of individuals, its adverse effects have been particularly detrimental to adolescents. In this article, I discuss evidence that shows the effects of the pandemic on adolescent patients, potential reasons for this increased distress, and what types of coping mechanisms adolescents have used to counter these effects.

Increases in multiple measures of psychopathology

Multiple online surveys and other studies have documented the pandemic’s impact on younger individuals. In the United States, visits to emergency departments by pediatric patients increased in the months after the first lockdown period.1 Several studies found increased rates of anxiety and depression among adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic.2,3 In an online survey of 359 children and 3,254 adolescents in China, 22% of respondents reported that they experienced depressive symptoms.3 In an online survey of 1,054 Canadian adolescents, 43% said they were “very concerned” about the pandemic.4 In an online survey of 7,353 adolescents in the United States, 37% reported suicidal ideation during the pandemic compared to 17% in 2017.5 A Chinese study found that smartphone and internet addiction was significantly associated with increased levels of depressive symptoms during the pandemic.3 In a survey in the Philippines, 16.3% of adolescents reported moderate-to-severe psychological impairment during the pandemic; the rates of COVID-19–related anxiety were higher among girls vs boys.6 Alcohol and cannabis use increased among Canadian adolescents during the pandemic, according to an online survey.7 Adolescents with anorexia nervosa reported a 70% increase in poor eating habits and more thoughts associated with eating disorders during the pandemic.8 A Danish study found that children and adolescents newly diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or who had completed treatment exhibited worsening OCD, anxiety, and depressive symptoms during the pandemic.9 An online survey of 6,196 Chinese adolescents found that those with a higher number of pre-pandemic adverse childhood experiences, such as abuse and neglect, had elevated posttraumatic stress symptoms and anxiety during the onset of the pandemic.10

Underlying causes of pandemic-induced distress

Limited social connectedness during the pandemic is a major reason for distress among adolescents. A review of 80 studies found that social isolation and loneliness as a result of social distancing and quarantining were associated with an increased risk of depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and self-harm.11 Parents’ stress about the risks of COVID-19 was correlated with worsening mental health in their adolescent children.12 A Chinese study found that the amount of time students spent on smartphones and social media doubled during the pandemic.13 In an online survey of 7,890 Chinese adolescents, greater social media, internet, and smartphone use was associated with increased anxiety and depression.14 This may be in part the result of adolescents spending time reading COVID-related news.

Coping mechanisms to increase well-being

Researchers have identified several positive coping mechanisms adolescents employed during the pandemic. Although some data suggest that increased internet use raises the risk of COVID-related distress, for certain adolescents, using social media to stay connected with friends and relatives was a buffer for feelings of loneliness and might have increased mental well-being.15 Other common coping mechanisms include relying on faith, volunteering, and starting new hobbies.16 During the pandemic, there were higher rates of playing outside and increased physical activity, which correlated with positive mental health outcomes.16 An online survey of 1,040 adolescents found that those who looked to the future optimistically and confidently had a higher health-related quality of life.17

Continuing an emphasis on adolescent well-being

Although data are limited, adolescents can continue to use these coping mechanisms to maintain their well-being, even if COVID-related restrictions are lifted or reimplemented. During these difficult times, it is imperative for adolescents to get the mental health services they need, and for psychiatric clinicians to continue to find avenues to promote resilience and mental wellness among young patients.

While the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the mental health of a wide range of individuals, its adverse effects have been particularly detrimental to adolescents. In this article, I discuss evidence that shows the effects of the pandemic on adolescent patients, potential reasons for this increased distress, and what types of coping mechanisms adolescents have used to counter these effects.

Increases in multiple measures of psychopathology

Multiple online surveys and other studies have documented the pandemic’s impact on younger individuals. In the United States, visits to emergency departments by pediatric patients increased in the months after the first lockdown period.1 Several studies found increased rates of anxiety and depression among adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic.2,3 In an online survey of 359 children and 3,254 adolescents in China, 22% of respondents reported that they experienced depressive symptoms.3 In an online survey of 1,054 Canadian adolescents, 43% said they were “very concerned” about the pandemic.4 In an online survey of 7,353 adolescents in the United States, 37% reported suicidal ideation during the pandemic compared to 17% in 2017.5 A Chinese study found that smartphone and internet addiction was significantly associated with increased levels of depressive symptoms during the pandemic.3 In a survey in the Philippines, 16.3% of adolescents reported moderate-to-severe psychological impairment during the pandemic; the rates of COVID-19–related anxiety were higher among girls vs boys.6 Alcohol and cannabis use increased among Canadian adolescents during the pandemic, according to an online survey.7 Adolescents with anorexia nervosa reported a 70% increase in poor eating habits and more thoughts associated with eating disorders during the pandemic.8 A Danish study found that children and adolescents newly diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or who had completed treatment exhibited worsening OCD, anxiety, and depressive symptoms during the pandemic.9 An online survey of 6,196 Chinese adolescents found that those with a higher number of pre-pandemic adverse childhood experiences, such as abuse and neglect, had elevated posttraumatic stress symptoms and anxiety during the onset of the pandemic.10

Underlying causes of pandemic-induced distress

Limited social connectedness during the pandemic is a major reason for distress among adolescents. A review of 80 studies found that social isolation and loneliness as a result of social distancing and quarantining were associated with an increased risk of depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and self-harm.11 Parents’ stress about the risks of COVID-19 was correlated with worsening mental health in their adolescent children.12 A Chinese study found that the amount of time students spent on smartphones and social media doubled during the pandemic.13 In an online survey of 7,890 Chinese adolescents, greater social media, internet, and smartphone use was associated with increased anxiety and depression.14 This may be in part the result of adolescents spending time reading COVID-related news.

Coping mechanisms to increase well-being

Researchers have identified several positive coping mechanisms adolescents employed during the pandemic. Although some data suggest that increased internet use raises the risk of COVID-related distress, for certain adolescents, using social media to stay connected with friends and relatives was a buffer for feelings of loneliness and might have increased mental well-being.15 Other common coping mechanisms include relying on faith, volunteering, and starting new hobbies.16 During the pandemic, there were higher rates of playing outside and increased physical activity, which correlated with positive mental health outcomes.16 An online survey of 1,040 adolescents found that those who looked to the future optimistically and confidently had a higher health-related quality of life.17

Continuing an emphasis on adolescent well-being

Although data are limited, adolescents can continue to use these coping mechanisms to maintain their well-being, even if COVID-related restrictions are lifted or reimplemented. During these difficult times, it is imperative for adolescents to get the mental health services they need, and for psychiatric clinicians to continue to find avenues to promote resilience and mental wellness among young patients.

References

1. Leeb RT, Bitsko RH, Radhakrishnan L, et al. Mental health–related emergency department visits among children aged <18 years during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, January 1-October 17, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(45):1675-1680. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a3
2. Oosterhoff B, Palmer CA, Wilson J, et al. Adolescents’ motivations to engage in social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: associations with mental and social health. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(2):179-185. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.004
3. Duan L, Shao X, Wang Y, et al. An investigation of mental health status of children and adolescents in China during the outbreak of COVID-19. J Affect Disord. 2020;275:112-118. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.06.029
4. Ellis WE, Dumas TM, Forbes LM. Physically isolated but socially connected: psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Can J Behav Sci. 2020;52(3):177-187. doi:10.1037/cbs0000215
5. Murata S, Rezeppa T, Thoma B, et al. The psychiatric sequelae of the COVID-19 pandemic in adolescents, adults, and health care workers. Depress Anxiety. 2021;38(2):233-246. doi:10.1002/da.23120
6. Tee ML, Tee CA, Anlacan JP, et al. Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines. J Affect Disord. 2020;277:379-391. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.043
7. Dumas TM, Ellis W, Litt DM. What does adolescent substance use look like during the COVID-19 pandemic? Examining changes in frequency, social contexts, and pandemic-related predictors. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(3):354-361. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.06.018
8. Schlegl S, Maier J, Meule A, et al. Eating disorders in times of the COVID-19 pandemic—results from an online survey of patients with anorexia nervosa. Int J Eat Disord. 2020;53:1791-1800. doi:10.1002/eat.23374.
9. Nissen JB, Højgaard D, Thomsen PH. The immediate effect of COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents with obsessive compulsive disorder. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20(1):511. doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02905-5
10. Guo J, Fu M, Liu D, et al. Is the psychological impact of exposure to COVID-19 stronger in adolescents with pre-pandemic maltreatment experiences? A survey of rural Chinese adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 2020;110(Pt 2):104667. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104667
11. Loades ME, Chatburn E, Higson-Sweeney N, et al. Rapid Systematic Review: The impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(11):1218-1239.e3. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.05.009
12. Spinelli M, Lionetti F, Setti A, et al. Parenting stress during the COVID-19 outbreak: socioeconomic and environmental risk factors and implications for children emotion regulation. Fam Process. 2021;60(2):639-653. doi:10.1111/famp.12601
13. Chen IH, Chen CY, Pakpour AH, et al. Internet-related behaviors and psychological distress among schoolchildren during COVID-19 school suspension. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(10):1099-1102.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.06.007
14. Li W, Zhang Y, Wang J, et al. Association of home quarantine and mental health among teenagers in Wuhan, China, during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(3):313-316. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.5499
15. Janssen, LHC, Kullberg, MJ, Verkuil B, et al. Does the COVID-19 pandemic impact parents’ and adolescents’ well-being? An EMA-study on daily affect and parenting. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240962. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240962
16. Banati P, Jones N, Youssef S. Intersecting vulnerabilities: the impacts of COVID-19 on the psycho-emotional lives of young people in low- and middle-income countries. Eur J Dev Res. 2020;32(5):1613-1638. doi:10.1057/s41287-020-00325-5
17. Ravens-Sieberer U, Kaman A, Otto C, et al. Mental health and quality of life in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic—results of the COPSY study. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020;117(48):828-829. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2020.0828

References

1. Leeb RT, Bitsko RH, Radhakrishnan L, et al. Mental health–related emergency department visits among children aged <18 years during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, January 1-October 17, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(45):1675-1680. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6945a3
2. Oosterhoff B, Palmer CA, Wilson J, et al. Adolescents’ motivations to engage in social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic: associations with mental and social health. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(2):179-185. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.004
3. Duan L, Shao X, Wang Y, et al. An investigation of mental health status of children and adolescents in China during the outbreak of COVID-19. J Affect Disord. 2020;275:112-118. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.06.029
4. Ellis WE, Dumas TM, Forbes LM. Physically isolated but socially connected: psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Can J Behav Sci. 2020;52(3):177-187. doi:10.1037/cbs0000215
5. Murata S, Rezeppa T, Thoma B, et al. The psychiatric sequelae of the COVID-19 pandemic in adolescents, adults, and health care workers. Depress Anxiety. 2021;38(2):233-246. doi:10.1002/da.23120
6. Tee ML, Tee CA, Anlacan JP, et al. Psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines. J Affect Disord. 2020;277:379-391. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2020.08.043
7. Dumas TM, Ellis W, Litt DM. What does adolescent substance use look like during the COVID-19 pandemic? Examining changes in frequency, social contexts, and pandemic-related predictors. J Adolesc Health. 2020;67(3):354-361. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.06.018
8. Schlegl S, Maier J, Meule A, et al. Eating disorders in times of the COVID-19 pandemic—results from an online survey of patients with anorexia nervosa. Int J Eat Disord. 2020;53:1791-1800. doi:10.1002/eat.23374.
9. Nissen JB, Højgaard D, Thomsen PH. The immediate effect of COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents with obsessive compulsive disorder. BMC Psychiatry. 2020;20(1):511. doi:10.1186/s12888-020-02905-5
10. Guo J, Fu M, Liu D, et al. Is the psychological impact of exposure to COVID-19 stronger in adolescents with pre-pandemic maltreatment experiences? A survey of rural Chinese adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 2020;110(Pt 2):104667. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104667
11. Loades ME, Chatburn E, Higson-Sweeney N, et al. Rapid Systematic Review: The impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of COVID-19. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(11):1218-1239.e3. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.05.009
12. Spinelli M, Lionetti F, Setti A, et al. Parenting stress during the COVID-19 outbreak: socioeconomic and environmental risk factors and implications for children emotion regulation. Fam Process. 2021;60(2):639-653. doi:10.1111/famp.12601
13. Chen IH, Chen CY, Pakpour AH, et al. Internet-related behaviors and psychological distress among schoolchildren during COVID-19 school suspension. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020;59(10):1099-1102.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2020.06.007
14. Li W, Zhang Y, Wang J, et al. Association of home quarantine and mental health among teenagers in Wuhan, China, during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Pediatr. 2021;175(3):313-316. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.5499
15. Janssen, LHC, Kullberg, MJ, Verkuil B, et al. Does the COVID-19 pandemic impact parents’ and adolescents’ well-being? An EMA-study on daily affect and parenting. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240962. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0240962
16. Banati P, Jones N, Youssef S. Intersecting vulnerabilities: the impacts of COVID-19 on the psycho-emotional lives of young people in low- and middle-income countries. Eur J Dev Res. 2020;32(5):1613-1638. doi:10.1057/s41287-020-00325-5
17. Ravens-Sieberer U, Kaman A, Otto C, et al. Mental health and quality of life in children and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic—results of the COPSY study. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020;117(48):828-829. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2020.0828

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Page Number
e1-e2
Page Number
e1-e2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
The impact of COVID-19 on adolescents’ mental health
Display Headline
The impact of COVID-19 on adolescents’ mental health
Sections
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

Why we should be scrutinizing the rising prevalence of adult ADHD

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/01/2022 - 01:15
Display Headline
Why we should be scrutinizing the rising prevalence of adult ADHD

In patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), stimulants reduce impulsivity and improve attention and focus. In individuals who do not have this disorder, stimulants are believed to enhance cognition, attention, and physical performance. In this article, I describe how a patient whose intermittent use of stimulants for motivation and cognitive enhancement shaped my approach to the diagnosis of ADHD.

Instant gratification and quick solutions

When I joined my psychiatry residency program, I expected to primarily treat patients who had depression, bipolar disorder, or psychosis. However, as I transitioned to my second year of residency, most patients I was assigned to had been diagnosed with ADHD. One of them was a 30-year-old in his fourth year of dental school. On his first visit, he requested a refill of dextroamphetamine and amphetamine 10 mg twice a day. He had been diagnosed with ADHD 5 years ago. He explained that he only needed this medication when preparing for his board examinations to motivate him and boost his focus and retention before studying. His study schedule included the exact doses and times he planned to take his stimulant.

I asked him questions to confirm the diagnosis, but he rushed to reassure me that he had already been diagnosed with ADHD and had been doing well on dextroamphetamine and amphetamine for many years. I was inclined to question his diagnosis of ADHD after learning of his “as-needed” use of stimulants as brain enhancers. His medical record reflecting the diagnosis of ADHD dated back to when he was a first-year dental student. The diagnosis was based on the patient’s report of procrastination for as long as he could remember. It also hinged on difficulties learning a second language and math being a challenging subject for him. Despite this, he managed to do well in school and earn an undergraduate degree, well enough to later pursue dentistry at a reputable university.

I thought, “Isn’t it normal to lose motivation and have doubts when preparing for a high-stakes exam like the boards? Aren’t these negative thoughts distracting enough to render sustained focus impossible? Doesn’t everyone struggle with procrastination, especially when they need to study? If learning a new language requires devotion, consistency, and sacrifice, isn’t it inherently challenging? Doesn’t good performance in math depend on multiple factors (ie, a strong foundation, cumulative learning, frequent practice), and thus leaves many students struggling?”

This interaction and many similar ones made me scrutinize the diagnosis of ADHD in patients I encounter in clinical settings. We live in a society where instant gratification is cherished, and quick fixes are pursued with little contemplation of pitfalls. Students use stimulants to cram for exams, high-functioning professionals use them to meet deadlines, and athletes use them to enhance performance and improve reaction times. Psychiatry seems to be drawn into the demands of society and may be fueling the “quick-fix” mentality by prescribing stimulants to healthy individuals who want to improve their focus, and then diagnosing them with ADHD to align the prescription with an appropriate diagnosis. Research on the adverse effects of stimulant use in adults is not convincing nor conclusive enough to sway prescribers from denying the average adult patient a stimulant to enhance cognitive function before a high-stakes exam or a critical, career-shaping project if they present with some ADHD traits, which the patient might even hyperbolize to secure the desired prescription. All of this may contribute to the perceived rising prevalence of ADHD among adults.

As for my 30-year-old dental student, I reasoned that continuing his medication, for now, would help me establish rapport and trust. This would allow me to counsel him on the long-term adverse effects of stimulants, and develop a plan to optimize his sleep, focus, and time management skills, eventually improving his cognition and attention naturally. Unfortunately, he did not show up to future appointments after I sent him the refill.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Akbar is a PGY-3 Psychiatry Resident, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgments
The author thanks Robert Diener, MD, for his thoughtful review of this article.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(7)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1-e2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Akbar is a PGY-3 Psychiatry Resident, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgments
The author thanks Robert Diener, MD, for his thoughtful review of this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Akbar is a PGY-3 Psychiatry Resident, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgments
The author thanks Robert Diener, MD, for his thoughtful review of this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

In patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), stimulants reduce impulsivity and improve attention and focus. In individuals who do not have this disorder, stimulants are believed to enhance cognition, attention, and physical performance. In this article, I describe how a patient whose intermittent use of stimulants for motivation and cognitive enhancement shaped my approach to the diagnosis of ADHD.

Instant gratification and quick solutions

When I joined my psychiatry residency program, I expected to primarily treat patients who had depression, bipolar disorder, or psychosis. However, as I transitioned to my second year of residency, most patients I was assigned to had been diagnosed with ADHD. One of them was a 30-year-old in his fourth year of dental school. On his first visit, he requested a refill of dextroamphetamine and amphetamine 10 mg twice a day. He had been diagnosed with ADHD 5 years ago. He explained that he only needed this medication when preparing for his board examinations to motivate him and boost his focus and retention before studying. His study schedule included the exact doses and times he planned to take his stimulant.

I asked him questions to confirm the diagnosis, but he rushed to reassure me that he had already been diagnosed with ADHD and had been doing well on dextroamphetamine and amphetamine for many years. I was inclined to question his diagnosis of ADHD after learning of his “as-needed” use of stimulants as brain enhancers. His medical record reflecting the diagnosis of ADHD dated back to when he was a first-year dental student. The diagnosis was based on the patient’s report of procrastination for as long as he could remember. It also hinged on difficulties learning a second language and math being a challenging subject for him. Despite this, he managed to do well in school and earn an undergraduate degree, well enough to later pursue dentistry at a reputable university.

I thought, “Isn’t it normal to lose motivation and have doubts when preparing for a high-stakes exam like the boards? Aren’t these negative thoughts distracting enough to render sustained focus impossible? Doesn’t everyone struggle with procrastination, especially when they need to study? If learning a new language requires devotion, consistency, and sacrifice, isn’t it inherently challenging? Doesn’t good performance in math depend on multiple factors (ie, a strong foundation, cumulative learning, frequent practice), and thus leaves many students struggling?”

This interaction and many similar ones made me scrutinize the diagnosis of ADHD in patients I encounter in clinical settings. We live in a society where instant gratification is cherished, and quick fixes are pursued with little contemplation of pitfalls. Students use stimulants to cram for exams, high-functioning professionals use them to meet deadlines, and athletes use them to enhance performance and improve reaction times. Psychiatry seems to be drawn into the demands of society and may be fueling the “quick-fix” mentality by prescribing stimulants to healthy individuals who want to improve their focus, and then diagnosing them with ADHD to align the prescription with an appropriate diagnosis. Research on the adverse effects of stimulant use in adults is not convincing nor conclusive enough to sway prescribers from denying the average adult patient a stimulant to enhance cognitive function before a high-stakes exam or a critical, career-shaping project if they present with some ADHD traits, which the patient might even hyperbolize to secure the desired prescription. All of this may contribute to the perceived rising prevalence of ADHD among adults.

As for my 30-year-old dental student, I reasoned that continuing his medication, for now, would help me establish rapport and trust. This would allow me to counsel him on the long-term adverse effects of stimulants, and develop a plan to optimize his sleep, focus, and time management skills, eventually improving his cognition and attention naturally. Unfortunately, he did not show up to future appointments after I sent him the refill.

In patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), stimulants reduce impulsivity and improve attention and focus. In individuals who do not have this disorder, stimulants are believed to enhance cognition, attention, and physical performance. In this article, I describe how a patient whose intermittent use of stimulants for motivation and cognitive enhancement shaped my approach to the diagnosis of ADHD.

Instant gratification and quick solutions

When I joined my psychiatry residency program, I expected to primarily treat patients who had depression, bipolar disorder, or psychosis. However, as I transitioned to my second year of residency, most patients I was assigned to had been diagnosed with ADHD. One of them was a 30-year-old in his fourth year of dental school. On his first visit, he requested a refill of dextroamphetamine and amphetamine 10 mg twice a day. He had been diagnosed with ADHD 5 years ago. He explained that he only needed this medication when preparing for his board examinations to motivate him and boost his focus and retention before studying. His study schedule included the exact doses and times he planned to take his stimulant.

I asked him questions to confirm the diagnosis, but he rushed to reassure me that he had already been diagnosed with ADHD and had been doing well on dextroamphetamine and amphetamine for many years. I was inclined to question his diagnosis of ADHD after learning of his “as-needed” use of stimulants as brain enhancers. His medical record reflecting the diagnosis of ADHD dated back to when he was a first-year dental student. The diagnosis was based on the patient’s report of procrastination for as long as he could remember. It also hinged on difficulties learning a second language and math being a challenging subject for him. Despite this, he managed to do well in school and earn an undergraduate degree, well enough to later pursue dentistry at a reputable university.

I thought, “Isn’t it normal to lose motivation and have doubts when preparing for a high-stakes exam like the boards? Aren’t these negative thoughts distracting enough to render sustained focus impossible? Doesn’t everyone struggle with procrastination, especially when they need to study? If learning a new language requires devotion, consistency, and sacrifice, isn’t it inherently challenging? Doesn’t good performance in math depend on multiple factors (ie, a strong foundation, cumulative learning, frequent practice), and thus leaves many students struggling?”

This interaction and many similar ones made me scrutinize the diagnosis of ADHD in patients I encounter in clinical settings. We live in a society where instant gratification is cherished, and quick fixes are pursued with little contemplation of pitfalls. Students use stimulants to cram for exams, high-functioning professionals use them to meet deadlines, and athletes use them to enhance performance and improve reaction times. Psychiatry seems to be drawn into the demands of society and may be fueling the “quick-fix” mentality by prescribing stimulants to healthy individuals who want to improve their focus, and then diagnosing them with ADHD to align the prescription with an appropriate diagnosis. Research on the adverse effects of stimulant use in adults is not convincing nor conclusive enough to sway prescribers from denying the average adult patient a stimulant to enhance cognitive function before a high-stakes exam or a critical, career-shaping project if they present with some ADHD traits, which the patient might even hyperbolize to secure the desired prescription. All of this may contribute to the perceived rising prevalence of ADHD among adults.

As for my 30-year-old dental student, I reasoned that continuing his medication, for now, would help me establish rapport and trust. This would allow me to counsel him on the long-term adverse effects of stimulants, and develop a plan to optimize his sleep, focus, and time management skills, eventually improving his cognition and attention naturally. Unfortunately, he did not show up to future appointments after I sent him the refill.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(7)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(7)
Page Number
e1-e2
Page Number
e1-e2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Why we should be scrutinizing the rising prevalence of adult ADHD
Display Headline
Why we should be scrutinizing the rising prevalence of adult ADHD
Sections
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

Caring for Muslim patients who fast during Ramadan

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 06/01/2022 - 01:15
Display Headline
Caring for Muslim patients who fast during Ramadan

Ramadan is one of the obligatory pillars in Islam during which healthy Muslims are required to fast from dawn until sunset every day for 1 month. There are an estimated 3.45 million Muslims in the United States, and this population will continue to grow by 100,000 per year.1 With the increased growth of the Muslim population, it is important for clinicians to be aware of how patients of Muslim faith are affected during Ramadan. In this article, we explore the potential risks, as well as the benefits, the month of Ramadan brings to patients. We will also explain how being religiously aware is necessary to provide optimal care for these individuals.

For some patients, fasting may pose risks

Similar to other communities in the United States, individuals who are Muslim experience mood disorders, anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and other psychiatric illnesses.2 During the month of Ramadan, Muslims are to abstain completely from eating and drinking from dawn until sunset. This includes medications as well as food and drink.

Due to these circumstances, patients will often change the timing, frequency, and dosing of their medications to allow them to fast. One study found 60% of Muslims made medication adjustments during Ramadan without seeking medical advice.3 It is possible that such alterations may be detrimental. During Ramadan, some Muslims wake up early in the morning to eat a pre-dawn meal, and often go back to sleep. This has been reported to cause a delay in sleep-wake times and to reduce rapid eye movement sleep.4 These circadian rhythm changes can be detrimental to patients with bipolar disorder. One study found higher rates of relapse to depression and mania in patients with bipolar disorder who were fasting during Ramadan.5 Circadian rhythm disturbances also may worsen depression.6 Another point of concern is patients with eating disorders. One small case series (N = 6) found that fasting during Ramadan exacerbated symptoms in patients with eating disorders.7

Another concern is that dehydration while fasting can lead to lithium toxicity. However, one study found lithium levels remained stable while fasting for 10 to 12 hours.5 Another showed that changing lithium dosing from twice a day to once a day allowed for easier administration without causing a subtherapeutic change in blood lithium levels.8

The practice also may have benefits for mental health

For many Muslims, Ramadan is the best time of the year, where they reconnect with their religion and experience the utmost spiritual growth. Studies have shown that the incidence of suicide is lowest during Ramadan compared to other months.9 A study of older men found that intermittent fasting and calorie restriction (not during Ramadan) resulted in decreases in tension, confusion, anger, and mood disturbance.10 Another study found that fasting during Ramadan had a positive impact on depression, anxiety, stress, and cognitive function.11

Clinical considerations

To provide the best care for Muslim patients during Ramadan, clinicians should take a holistic approach and take all factors into consideration. It is common for circadian rhythm disruptions to exacerbate mood disorders, so encourage patients to maintain healthy sleep hygiene to their best ability during this month. Another important consideration is medication timing and dosing.12 For patients prescribed a medication that typically is taken twice a day, determine if this dosing can be changed to once a day, or if both doses can be taken when it is permissible to eat (sunset to dawn). For medications that are absorbed with food, consider how these medications might be adjusted and maintained while a patient is fasting. Some medications may be sedating or activating, so the timing of administration may need to be adjusted to meet the patient’s needs. Lastly, keep in mind that certain medications can have withdrawal effects, and the likelihood of this occurring while a patient is fasting.

One vital point is that if a patient is at high risk of clinically decompensating due to fasting or medication adjustments or discontinuation, advise them to not fast. Muslims with physical or mental illnesses are excused from fasting. Bear in mind that because Ramadan is meant to be a month of heightened spirituality, many Muslims will prefer to fast.

References

1. Pew Research Center. Demographic portrait of Muslim Americans. Published July 26, 2017. Accessed January 15, 2019. https://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/demographic-portrait-of-muslim-americans
2. Basit A, Hamid M. Mental health issues of Muslim Americans. J IMA. 2010;42(3):106-110.
3. Aslam M, Assad A. Drug regimens and fasting during Ramadan: a survey in Kuwait. Public Health. 1986;100(1):49-53.
4. Qasrawi SO, Pandi-Perumal SR, BaHammam AS. The effect of intermittent fasting during Ramadan on sleep, sleepiness, cognitive function, and circadian rhythm. Sleep Breath. 2017;21(3):577-586.
5. Eddahby S, Kadri N, Moussaoui D. Fasting during Ramadan is associated with a higher recurrence rate in patients with bipolar disorder. World Psychiatry. 2014;13(1):97.
6. Germain A, Kupfer DJ. Circadian rhythm disturbances in depression. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(7):571-585.
7. Akgül S, Derman O, Kanbur NÖ. Fasting during Ramadan: a religious factor as a possible trigger or exacerbator for eating disorders in adolescents. Int J Eat Disord. 2014;47(8):905-910.
8. Kadri N, Mouchtaq N, Hakkou F, et al. Relapses in bipolar patients: changes in social rhythm? Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2000;3(1):45-49.
9. Taktak S, Kumral B, Unsal A, et al. Evidence for an association between suicide and religion: a 33-year retrospective autopsy analysis of suicide by hanging during the month of Ramadan in Istanbul. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2016;48(2):121-131.
10. Hussin NM, Shahar S, Teng NI, et al. Efficacy of fasting and calorie restriction (FCR) on mood and depression among ageing men. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(8):674-680.
11. Amin A, Sai Sailesh K, Mishra S, et al. Effects of fasting during Ramadan month on depression, anxiety and stress and cognition. Int J Med Res Rev. 2016;4(5):771-774.
12. Furqan Z, Awaad R, Kurdyak P, et al. Considerations for clinicians treating Muslim patients with psychiatric disorders during Ramadan. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6(7):556-557.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Adam Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania. Dr. Amaar Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Millcreek Community Hospital Psychiatry Residency Program, Erie, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1-e2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Adam Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania. Dr. Amaar Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Millcreek Community Hospital Psychiatry Residency Program, Erie, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Adam Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Penn Highlands DuBois, DuBois, Pennsylvania. Dr. Amaar Malik is PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Millcreek Community Hospital Psychiatry Residency Program, Erie, Pennsylvania.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Ramadan is one of the obligatory pillars in Islam during which healthy Muslims are required to fast from dawn until sunset every day for 1 month. There are an estimated 3.45 million Muslims in the United States, and this population will continue to grow by 100,000 per year.1 With the increased growth of the Muslim population, it is important for clinicians to be aware of how patients of Muslim faith are affected during Ramadan. In this article, we explore the potential risks, as well as the benefits, the month of Ramadan brings to patients. We will also explain how being religiously aware is necessary to provide optimal care for these individuals.

For some patients, fasting may pose risks

Similar to other communities in the United States, individuals who are Muslim experience mood disorders, anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and other psychiatric illnesses.2 During the month of Ramadan, Muslims are to abstain completely from eating and drinking from dawn until sunset. This includes medications as well as food and drink.

Due to these circumstances, patients will often change the timing, frequency, and dosing of their medications to allow them to fast. One study found 60% of Muslims made medication adjustments during Ramadan without seeking medical advice.3 It is possible that such alterations may be detrimental. During Ramadan, some Muslims wake up early in the morning to eat a pre-dawn meal, and often go back to sleep. This has been reported to cause a delay in sleep-wake times and to reduce rapid eye movement sleep.4 These circadian rhythm changes can be detrimental to patients with bipolar disorder. One study found higher rates of relapse to depression and mania in patients with bipolar disorder who were fasting during Ramadan.5 Circadian rhythm disturbances also may worsen depression.6 Another point of concern is patients with eating disorders. One small case series (N = 6) found that fasting during Ramadan exacerbated symptoms in patients with eating disorders.7

Another concern is that dehydration while fasting can lead to lithium toxicity. However, one study found lithium levels remained stable while fasting for 10 to 12 hours.5 Another showed that changing lithium dosing from twice a day to once a day allowed for easier administration without causing a subtherapeutic change in blood lithium levels.8

The practice also may have benefits for mental health

For many Muslims, Ramadan is the best time of the year, where they reconnect with their religion and experience the utmost spiritual growth. Studies have shown that the incidence of suicide is lowest during Ramadan compared to other months.9 A study of older men found that intermittent fasting and calorie restriction (not during Ramadan) resulted in decreases in tension, confusion, anger, and mood disturbance.10 Another study found that fasting during Ramadan had a positive impact on depression, anxiety, stress, and cognitive function.11

Clinical considerations

To provide the best care for Muslim patients during Ramadan, clinicians should take a holistic approach and take all factors into consideration. It is common for circadian rhythm disruptions to exacerbate mood disorders, so encourage patients to maintain healthy sleep hygiene to their best ability during this month. Another important consideration is medication timing and dosing.12 For patients prescribed a medication that typically is taken twice a day, determine if this dosing can be changed to once a day, or if both doses can be taken when it is permissible to eat (sunset to dawn). For medications that are absorbed with food, consider how these medications might be adjusted and maintained while a patient is fasting. Some medications may be sedating or activating, so the timing of administration may need to be adjusted to meet the patient’s needs. Lastly, keep in mind that certain medications can have withdrawal effects, and the likelihood of this occurring while a patient is fasting.

One vital point is that if a patient is at high risk of clinically decompensating due to fasting or medication adjustments or discontinuation, advise them to not fast. Muslims with physical or mental illnesses are excused from fasting. Bear in mind that because Ramadan is meant to be a month of heightened spirituality, many Muslims will prefer to fast.

Ramadan is one of the obligatory pillars in Islam during which healthy Muslims are required to fast from dawn until sunset every day for 1 month. There are an estimated 3.45 million Muslims in the United States, and this population will continue to grow by 100,000 per year.1 With the increased growth of the Muslim population, it is important for clinicians to be aware of how patients of Muslim faith are affected during Ramadan. In this article, we explore the potential risks, as well as the benefits, the month of Ramadan brings to patients. We will also explain how being religiously aware is necessary to provide optimal care for these individuals.

For some patients, fasting may pose risks

Similar to other communities in the United States, individuals who are Muslim experience mood disorders, anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and other psychiatric illnesses.2 During the month of Ramadan, Muslims are to abstain completely from eating and drinking from dawn until sunset. This includes medications as well as food and drink.

Due to these circumstances, patients will often change the timing, frequency, and dosing of their medications to allow them to fast. One study found 60% of Muslims made medication adjustments during Ramadan without seeking medical advice.3 It is possible that such alterations may be detrimental. During Ramadan, some Muslims wake up early in the morning to eat a pre-dawn meal, and often go back to sleep. This has been reported to cause a delay in sleep-wake times and to reduce rapid eye movement sleep.4 These circadian rhythm changes can be detrimental to patients with bipolar disorder. One study found higher rates of relapse to depression and mania in patients with bipolar disorder who were fasting during Ramadan.5 Circadian rhythm disturbances also may worsen depression.6 Another point of concern is patients with eating disorders. One small case series (N = 6) found that fasting during Ramadan exacerbated symptoms in patients with eating disorders.7

Another concern is that dehydration while fasting can lead to lithium toxicity. However, one study found lithium levels remained stable while fasting for 10 to 12 hours.5 Another showed that changing lithium dosing from twice a day to once a day allowed for easier administration without causing a subtherapeutic change in blood lithium levels.8

The practice also may have benefits for mental health

For many Muslims, Ramadan is the best time of the year, where they reconnect with their religion and experience the utmost spiritual growth. Studies have shown that the incidence of suicide is lowest during Ramadan compared to other months.9 A study of older men found that intermittent fasting and calorie restriction (not during Ramadan) resulted in decreases in tension, confusion, anger, and mood disturbance.10 Another study found that fasting during Ramadan had a positive impact on depression, anxiety, stress, and cognitive function.11

Clinical considerations

To provide the best care for Muslim patients during Ramadan, clinicians should take a holistic approach and take all factors into consideration. It is common for circadian rhythm disruptions to exacerbate mood disorders, so encourage patients to maintain healthy sleep hygiene to their best ability during this month. Another important consideration is medication timing and dosing.12 For patients prescribed a medication that typically is taken twice a day, determine if this dosing can be changed to once a day, or if both doses can be taken when it is permissible to eat (sunset to dawn). For medications that are absorbed with food, consider how these medications might be adjusted and maintained while a patient is fasting. Some medications may be sedating or activating, so the timing of administration may need to be adjusted to meet the patient’s needs. Lastly, keep in mind that certain medications can have withdrawal effects, and the likelihood of this occurring while a patient is fasting.

One vital point is that if a patient is at high risk of clinically decompensating due to fasting or medication adjustments or discontinuation, advise them to not fast. Muslims with physical or mental illnesses are excused from fasting. Bear in mind that because Ramadan is meant to be a month of heightened spirituality, many Muslims will prefer to fast.

References

1. Pew Research Center. Demographic portrait of Muslim Americans. Published July 26, 2017. Accessed January 15, 2019. https://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/demographic-portrait-of-muslim-americans
2. Basit A, Hamid M. Mental health issues of Muslim Americans. J IMA. 2010;42(3):106-110.
3. Aslam M, Assad A. Drug regimens and fasting during Ramadan: a survey in Kuwait. Public Health. 1986;100(1):49-53.
4. Qasrawi SO, Pandi-Perumal SR, BaHammam AS. The effect of intermittent fasting during Ramadan on sleep, sleepiness, cognitive function, and circadian rhythm. Sleep Breath. 2017;21(3):577-586.
5. Eddahby S, Kadri N, Moussaoui D. Fasting during Ramadan is associated with a higher recurrence rate in patients with bipolar disorder. World Psychiatry. 2014;13(1):97.
6. Germain A, Kupfer DJ. Circadian rhythm disturbances in depression. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(7):571-585.
7. Akgül S, Derman O, Kanbur NÖ. Fasting during Ramadan: a religious factor as a possible trigger or exacerbator for eating disorders in adolescents. Int J Eat Disord. 2014;47(8):905-910.
8. Kadri N, Mouchtaq N, Hakkou F, et al. Relapses in bipolar patients: changes in social rhythm? Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2000;3(1):45-49.
9. Taktak S, Kumral B, Unsal A, et al. Evidence for an association between suicide and religion: a 33-year retrospective autopsy analysis of suicide by hanging during the month of Ramadan in Istanbul. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2016;48(2):121-131.
10. Hussin NM, Shahar S, Teng NI, et al. Efficacy of fasting and calorie restriction (FCR) on mood and depression among ageing men. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(8):674-680.
11. Amin A, Sai Sailesh K, Mishra S, et al. Effects of fasting during Ramadan month on depression, anxiety and stress and cognition. Int J Med Res Rev. 2016;4(5):771-774.
12. Furqan Z, Awaad R, Kurdyak P, et al. Considerations for clinicians treating Muslim patients with psychiatric disorders during Ramadan. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6(7):556-557.

References

1. Pew Research Center. Demographic portrait of Muslim Americans. Published July 26, 2017. Accessed January 15, 2019. https://www.pewforum.org/2017/07/26/demographic-portrait-of-muslim-americans
2. Basit A, Hamid M. Mental health issues of Muslim Americans. J IMA. 2010;42(3):106-110.
3. Aslam M, Assad A. Drug regimens and fasting during Ramadan: a survey in Kuwait. Public Health. 1986;100(1):49-53.
4. Qasrawi SO, Pandi-Perumal SR, BaHammam AS. The effect of intermittent fasting during Ramadan on sleep, sleepiness, cognitive function, and circadian rhythm. Sleep Breath. 2017;21(3):577-586.
5. Eddahby S, Kadri N, Moussaoui D. Fasting during Ramadan is associated with a higher recurrence rate in patients with bipolar disorder. World Psychiatry. 2014;13(1):97.
6. Germain A, Kupfer DJ. Circadian rhythm disturbances in depression. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2008;23(7):571-585.
7. Akgül S, Derman O, Kanbur NÖ. Fasting during Ramadan: a religious factor as a possible trigger or exacerbator for eating disorders in adolescents. Int J Eat Disord. 2014;47(8):905-910.
8. Kadri N, Mouchtaq N, Hakkou F, et al. Relapses in bipolar patients: changes in social rhythm? Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2000;3(1):45-49.
9. Taktak S, Kumral B, Unsal A, et al. Evidence for an association between suicide and religion: a 33-year retrospective autopsy analysis of suicide by hanging during the month of Ramadan in Istanbul. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2016;48(2):121-131.
10. Hussin NM, Shahar S, Teng NI, et al. Efficacy of fasting and calorie restriction (FCR) on mood and depression among ageing men. J Nutr Health Aging. 2013;17(8):674-680.
11. Amin A, Sai Sailesh K, Mishra S, et al. Effects of fasting during Ramadan month on depression, anxiety and stress and cognition. Int J Med Res Rev. 2016;4(5):771-774.
12. Furqan Z, Awaad R, Kurdyak P, et al. Considerations for clinicians treating Muslim patients with psychiatric disorders during Ramadan. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6(7):556-557.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(6)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(6)
Page Number
e1-e2
Page Number
e1-e2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Caring for Muslim patients who fast during Ramadan
Display Headline
Caring for Muslim patients who fast during Ramadan
Sections
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

Navigating Motherhood and Dermatology Residency

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/25/2022 - 15:44
Display Headline
Navigating Motherhood and Dermatology Residency

Motherhood and dermatology residency are both full-time jobs. The thought that a woman must either be superhuman to succeed at both or that success at one must come at the expense of the other is antiquated. With careful navigation and sufficient support, these two roles can complement and heighten one another. The most recent Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) report showed that nearly 60% of dermatology residents are women,1 with most women in training being of childbearing age. One study showed that female dermatologists were most likely to have children during residency (51% of those surveyed), despite residents reporting more barriers to childbearing at this career stage.2 Trainees thinking of starting a family have many considerations to navigate: timing of pregnancy, maternity leave scheduling, breastfeeding while working, and planning for childcare. For the first time in the history of the specialty, most active dermatologists in practice are women.3 Thus, the future of dermatology requires supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of these issues by today’s trainees.

Timing of Pregnancy

Timing of pregnancy can be a source of stress to the female dermatology resident. Barriers to childbearing during residency include the perception that women who have children during residency training are less committed to their jobs; concerns of overburdening fellow residents; and fear that residency may need to be extended, thereby delaying the ability to sit for the board examination.2 However, the potential increased risk for infertility in delaying pregnancy adds to the stress of pregnancy planning. A 2016 survey of female physicians (N=327) showed that 24.1% of respondents who had attempted conception were diagnosed with infertility, with an average age at diagnosis of 33.7 years.4 This is higher than the national average, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting that approximately 19% of women aged 15 to 49 years with no prior births experience infertility.5 In a 1992 survey of female physician residents (N=373) who gave birth during residency, 32% indicated that they would not recommend the experience to others; of the 68% who would recommend the experience, one-third encouraged timing delivery to occur in the last 2 months of residency due to benefits of continued insurance coverage, a decrease in clinic responsibilities, and the potential for extended maternity leave during hiatus between jobs.6 Although this may be a good strategy, studying and sitting for board examinations while caring for a newborn right after graduation may be overly difficult for some. The first year of residency was perceived as the most stressful time to be pregnant, with each subsequent year being less problematic.6 Planning pregnancy for delivery near the end of the second year and beginning of the third year of dermatology residency may be a reasonable choice.

Maternity Leave

The Family and Medical Leave Act entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave, with 12 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within 1 year of birth.7 The actual length of maternity leave taken by most surveyed female dermatologists (n=96) is shorter: 25% (24/96) took less than 4 weeks, 42.7% (41/96) took 4 to 8 weeks, 25% (24/96) took 9 to 12 weeks, and 7.3% (7/96) were able to take more than 12 weeks of maternity leave.2

The American Board of Dermatology implemented a new Resident Leave policy that went into effect July 1, 2021, stipulating that, within certain parameters, time spent away from training for family and parental leave would not exhaust vacation time or require an extension in training. Under this policy, absence from training exceeding 8 weeks (6 weeks leave, plus 2 weeks of vacation) in a given year should be approved only under exceptional circumstances and may necessitate additional training time to ensure that competency requirements are met.8 Although this policy is a step in the right direction, institutional policies still may vary. Dermatology residents planning to start a family during training should consider their plans for fellowship, as taking an extended maternity leave beyond 8 weeks may jeopardize a July fellowship start date.

Lactation and Residency

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends exclusive breastfeeding for approximately 6 months, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by the mother and infant.9 Successful lactation and achieving breastfeeding goals can be difficult during medical training. A national cross-sectional survey of female residents (N=312) showed that the median total time of breastfeeding and pumping was 9 months, with 74% continuing after 6 months and 13% continuing past 12 months. Of those surveyed, 73% reported residency limited their ability to lactate, and 37% stopped prior to their desired goal.10 As of July 1, 2020, the ACGME requires that residency programs and sponsoring institutions provide clean and private facilities for lactation that have refrigeration capabilities, with proximity appropriate for safe patient care.11 There has been a call to dermatology program leadership to support breastfeeding residents by providing sufficient time and space to pump; a breastfeeding resident will need a 20- to 30-minute break to express milk approximately every 3 hours during the work day.12 One innovative initiative to meet the ACGME lactation requirement reported by the Kansas University Medical Center Graduate Medical Education program (Kansas City, Kansas) was the purchase of wearable breast pumps to loan to residents. The benefits of wearable breast pumps are that they are discreet and can allow mothers to express milk inconspicuously while working, can increase milk supply, require less set up and expression time than traditional pumps, and can allow the mother to manage time more efficiently.13 Breastfeeding plans and goals should be discussed with program leadership before return from leave to strategize and anticipate gaps in clinic scheduling to accommodate the lactating resident.

Planning for Childcare

Resident hours can be long and erratic, making choices for childcare difficult. In one survey of female residents, 61% of married or partnered respondents (n=447) were delaying childbearing, and 46% cited lack of access to childcare as a reason.14 Not all dermatology residents are fortunate enough to match to a program near family, but close family support can be an undeniable asset during childrearing and should be weighed heavily when ranking programs. Options for childcare include relying on a stay-at-home spouse or other family member, a live-in or live-out nanny, part-time babysitters, and daycare. It is crucial to have multiple layers and back-up options for childcare available at any given time when working as a resident. Even with a child enrolled in a full-time daycare and a live-in nanny, a daycare closure due to a COVID-19 exposure or sudden medical emergency in the nanny can still leave unpredicted holes in your childcare plan, leaving the resident to potentially miss work to fill the gap. A survey of residents at one institution showed that the most common backup childcare plan for situations in which either the child or the regular caregiver is ill is for the nontrainee parent or spouse to stay home (45%; n=101), with 25% of respondents staying home to care for a sick child themselves, which clearly has an impact on the hospital. The article proposed implementation of on-site or near-site childcare for residents with extended hours or a 24-hour emergency drop-in availability.15 One institution reported success with the development of a departmentally funded childcare supplementation stipend offered to residents to support daycare costs during the first 6 months of a baby’s life.16

Final Thoughts

Due to the competitiveness of the field, dermatology residents are by nature high performing and academically successful. For a high achiever, the idea of potentially disappointing faculty and colleagues by starting a family during residency can be guilt inducing. Concerns about one’s ability to adequately study the breadth of dermatology while simultaneously raising a child can be distressing; however, there are many ways in which motherhood can hone skills to become a better dermatology resident. Through motherhood one can enhance time management skills, increase efficiency, and improve rapport with pediatric patients and trust with their parents/guardians. A dermatology resident may be her own harshest critic, but it is time that the future generation of dermatologists become their own greatest advocates for establishing supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of motherhood and dermatology residency.

References
  1. ACGME residents and fellows by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/interactive-data/acgme-residents-and-fellows-sex-and-specialty-2019
  2. Mattessich S, Shea K, Whitaker-Worth D. Parenting and female dermatologists’ perceptions of work-life balance. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2017;3:127-130. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2017.04.001
  3. Active physicians by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/workforce/interactive-data/active-physicians-sex-and-specialty-2019
  4. Stentz NC, Griffith KA, Perkins E, et al. Fertility and childbearing among American female physicians. J Womens Health. 2016;25:1059-1065. doi:10.1089/jwh.2015.5638
  5. Infertility. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. Updated March 1, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/
  6. Phelan ST. Sources of stress and support for the pregnant resident. Acad Med. 1992;67:408-410. doi:10.1097/00001888-199206000-00014
  7. Family and Medical Leave Act. US Department of Labor website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla
  8. American Board of Dermatology. Effective July 2021: new family leave policy. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.abderm.org/public/announcements/effective-july-2021-new-family-leave-policy.aspx
  9. Eidelman AI, Schanler RJ, Johnston M, et al. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics. 2012;129:E827-E841. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3552
  10. Peters GW, Kuczmarska-Haas A, Holliday EB, et al. Lactation challenges of resident physicians: results of a national survey. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:762. doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03436-3
  11. Common program requirements (residency) sections I-V table of implementation dates. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidencyImplementationTable.pdf
  12. Gracey LE, Mathes EF, Shinkai K. Supporting breastfeeding mothers during dermatology residency—challenges and best practices. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:117-118. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.3759
  13. McMillin A, Behravesh B, Byrne P, et al. A GME wearable breast pump program: an innovative method to meet ACGME requirements and federal law. J Grad Med Educ. 2021;13:422-423. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-20-01275.1
  14. Stack SW, Jagsi R, Biermann JS, et al. Childbearing decisions in residency: a multicenter survey of female residents. Acad Med. 2020;95:1550-1557. doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003549
  15. Snyder RA, Tarpley MJ, Phillips SE, et al. The case for on-site child care in residency training and afterward. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5:365-367. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-12-00294.1
  16. Key LL. Child care supplementation: aid for residents and advantages for residency programs. J Pediatr. 2008;153:449-450. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.05.028
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Samantha R. Pop, MD, 721 Fairfax Ave, Norfolk, VA 23507 (pops@evms.edu).

Issue
Cutis - 109(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E16-E18
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Samantha R. Pop, MD, 721 Fairfax Ave, Norfolk, VA 23507 (pops@evms.edu).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Samantha R. Pop, MD, 721 Fairfax Ave, Norfolk, VA 23507 (pops@evms.edu).

Article PDF
Article PDF

Motherhood and dermatology residency are both full-time jobs. The thought that a woman must either be superhuman to succeed at both or that success at one must come at the expense of the other is antiquated. With careful navigation and sufficient support, these two roles can complement and heighten one another. The most recent Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) report showed that nearly 60% of dermatology residents are women,1 with most women in training being of childbearing age. One study showed that female dermatologists were most likely to have children during residency (51% of those surveyed), despite residents reporting more barriers to childbearing at this career stage.2 Trainees thinking of starting a family have many considerations to navigate: timing of pregnancy, maternity leave scheduling, breastfeeding while working, and planning for childcare. For the first time in the history of the specialty, most active dermatologists in practice are women.3 Thus, the future of dermatology requires supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of these issues by today’s trainees.

Timing of Pregnancy

Timing of pregnancy can be a source of stress to the female dermatology resident. Barriers to childbearing during residency include the perception that women who have children during residency training are less committed to their jobs; concerns of overburdening fellow residents; and fear that residency may need to be extended, thereby delaying the ability to sit for the board examination.2 However, the potential increased risk for infertility in delaying pregnancy adds to the stress of pregnancy planning. A 2016 survey of female physicians (N=327) showed that 24.1% of respondents who had attempted conception were diagnosed with infertility, with an average age at diagnosis of 33.7 years.4 This is higher than the national average, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting that approximately 19% of women aged 15 to 49 years with no prior births experience infertility.5 In a 1992 survey of female physician residents (N=373) who gave birth during residency, 32% indicated that they would not recommend the experience to others; of the 68% who would recommend the experience, one-third encouraged timing delivery to occur in the last 2 months of residency due to benefits of continued insurance coverage, a decrease in clinic responsibilities, and the potential for extended maternity leave during hiatus between jobs.6 Although this may be a good strategy, studying and sitting for board examinations while caring for a newborn right after graduation may be overly difficult for some. The first year of residency was perceived as the most stressful time to be pregnant, with each subsequent year being less problematic.6 Planning pregnancy for delivery near the end of the second year and beginning of the third year of dermatology residency may be a reasonable choice.

Maternity Leave

The Family and Medical Leave Act entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave, with 12 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within 1 year of birth.7 The actual length of maternity leave taken by most surveyed female dermatologists (n=96) is shorter: 25% (24/96) took less than 4 weeks, 42.7% (41/96) took 4 to 8 weeks, 25% (24/96) took 9 to 12 weeks, and 7.3% (7/96) were able to take more than 12 weeks of maternity leave.2

The American Board of Dermatology implemented a new Resident Leave policy that went into effect July 1, 2021, stipulating that, within certain parameters, time spent away from training for family and parental leave would not exhaust vacation time or require an extension in training. Under this policy, absence from training exceeding 8 weeks (6 weeks leave, plus 2 weeks of vacation) in a given year should be approved only under exceptional circumstances and may necessitate additional training time to ensure that competency requirements are met.8 Although this policy is a step in the right direction, institutional policies still may vary. Dermatology residents planning to start a family during training should consider their plans for fellowship, as taking an extended maternity leave beyond 8 weeks may jeopardize a July fellowship start date.

Lactation and Residency

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends exclusive breastfeeding for approximately 6 months, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by the mother and infant.9 Successful lactation and achieving breastfeeding goals can be difficult during medical training. A national cross-sectional survey of female residents (N=312) showed that the median total time of breastfeeding and pumping was 9 months, with 74% continuing after 6 months and 13% continuing past 12 months. Of those surveyed, 73% reported residency limited their ability to lactate, and 37% stopped prior to their desired goal.10 As of July 1, 2020, the ACGME requires that residency programs and sponsoring institutions provide clean and private facilities for lactation that have refrigeration capabilities, with proximity appropriate for safe patient care.11 There has been a call to dermatology program leadership to support breastfeeding residents by providing sufficient time and space to pump; a breastfeeding resident will need a 20- to 30-minute break to express milk approximately every 3 hours during the work day.12 One innovative initiative to meet the ACGME lactation requirement reported by the Kansas University Medical Center Graduate Medical Education program (Kansas City, Kansas) was the purchase of wearable breast pumps to loan to residents. The benefits of wearable breast pumps are that they are discreet and can allow mothers to express milk inconspicuously while working, can increase milk supply, require less set up and expression time than traditional pumps, and can allow the mother to manage time more efficiently.13 Breastfeeding plans and goals should be discussed with program leadership before return from leave to strategize and anticipate gaps in clinic scheduling to accommodate the lactating resident.

Planning for Childcare

Resident hours can be long and erratic, making choices for childcare difficult. In one survey of female residents, 61% of married or partnered respondents (n=447) were delaying childbearing, and 46% cited lack of access to childcare as a reason.14 Not all dermatology residents are fortunate enough to match to a program near family, but close family support can be an undeniable asset during childrearing and should be weighed heavily when ranking programs. Options for childcare include relying on a stay-at-home spouse or other family member, a live-in or live-out nanny, part-time babysitters, and daycare. It is crucial to have multiple layers and back-up options for childcare available at any given time when working as a resident. Even with a child enrolled in a full-time daycare and a live-in nanny, a daycare closure due to a COVID-19 exposure or sudden medical emergency in the nanny can still leave unpredicted holes in your childcare plan, leaving the resident to potentially miss work to fill the gap. A survey of residents at one institution showed that the most common backup childcare plan for situations in which either the child or the regular caregiver is ill is for the nontrainee parent or spouse to stay home (45%; n=101), with 25% of respondents staying home to care for a sick child themselves, which clearly has an impact on the hospital. The article proposed implementation of on-site or near-site childcare for residents with extended hours or a 24-hour emergency drop-in availability.15 One institution reported success with the development of a departmentally funded childcare supplementation stipend offered to residents to support daycare costs during the first 6 months of a baby’s life.16

Final Thoughts

Due to the competitiveness of the field, dermatology residents are by nature high performing and academically successful. For a high achiever, the idea of potentially disappointing faculty and colleagues by starting a family during residency can be guilt inducing. Concerns about one’s ability to adequately study the breadth of dermatology while simultaneously raising a child can be distressing; however, there are many ways in which motherhood can hone skills to become a better dermatology resident. Through motherhood one can enhance time management skills, increase efficiency, and improve rapport with pediatric patients and trust with their parents/guardians. A dermatology resident may be her own harshest critic, but it is time that the future generation of dermatologists become their own greatest advocates for establishing supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of motherhood and dermatology residency.

Motherhood and dermatology residency are both full-time jobs. The thought that a woman must either be superhuman to succeed at both or that success at one must come at the expense of the other is antiquated. With careful navigation and sufficient support, these two roles can complement and heighten one another. The most recent Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) report showed that nearly 60% of dermatology residents are women,1 with most women in training being of childbearing age. One study showed that female dermatologists were most likely to have children during residency (51% of those surveyed), despite residents reporting more barriers to childbearing at this career stage.2 Trainees thinking of starting a family have many considerations to navigate: timing of pregnancy, maternity leave scheduling, breastfeeding while working, and planning for childcare. For the first time in the history of the specialty, most active dermatologists in practice are women.3 Thus, the future of dermatology requires supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of these issues by today’s trainees.

Timing of Pregnancy

Timing of pregnancy can be a source of stress to the female dermatology resident. Barriers to childbearing during residency include the perception that women who have children during residency training are less committed to their jobs; concerns of overburdening fellow residents; and fear that residency may need to be extended, thereby delaying the ability to sit for the board examination.2 However, the potential increased risk for infertility in delaying pregnancy adds to the stress of pregnancy planning. A 2016 survey of female physicians (N=327) showed that 24.1% of respondents who had attempted conception were diagnosed with infertility, with an average age at diagnosis of 33.7 years.4 This is higher than the national average, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reporting that approximately 19% of women aged 15 to 49 years with no prior births experience infertility.5 In a 1992 survey of female physician residents (N=373) who gave birth during residency, 32% indicated that they would not recommend the experience to others; of the 68% who would recommend the experience, one-third encouraged timing delivery to occur in the last 2 months of residency due to benefits of continued insurance coverage, a decrease in clinic responsibilities, and the potential for extended maternity leave during hiatus between jobs.6 Although this may be a good strategy, studying and sitting for board examinations while caring for a newborn right after graduation may be overly difficult for some. The first year of residency was perceived as the most stressful time to be pregnant, with each subsequent year being less problematic.6 Planning pregnancy for delivery near the end of the second year and beginning of the third year of dermatology residency may be a reasonable choice.

Maternity Leave

The Family and Medical Leave Act entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave, with 12 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within 1 year of birth.7 The actual length of maternity leave taken by most surveyed female dermatologists (n=96) is shorter: 25% (24/96) took less than 4 weeks, 42.7% (41/96) took 4 to 8 weeks, 25% (24/96) took 9 to 12 weeks, and 7.3% (7/96) were able to take more than 12 weeks of maternity leave.2

The American Board of Dermatology implemented a new Resident Leave policy that went into effect July 1, 2021, stipulating that, within certain parameters, time spent away from training for family and parental leave would not exhaust vacation time or require an extension in training. Under this policy, absence from training exceeding 8 weeks (6 weeks leave, plus 2 weeks of vacation) in a given year should be approved only under exceptional circumstances and may necessitate additional training time to ensure that competency requirements are met.8 Although this policy is a step in the right direction, institutional policies still may vary. Dermatology residents planning to start a family during training should consider their plans for fellowship, as taking an extended maternity leave beyond 8 weeks may jeopardize a July fellowship start date.

Lactation and Residency

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends exclusive breastfeeding for approximately 6 months, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by the mother and infant.9 Successful lactation and achieving breastfeeding goals can be difficult during medical training. A national cross-sectional survey of female residents (N=312) showed that the median total time of breastfeeding and pumping was 9 months, with 74% continuing after 6 months and 13% continuing past 12 months. Of those surveyed, 73% reported residency limited their ability to lactate, and 37% stopped prior to their desired goal.10 As of July 1, 2020, the ACGME requires that residency programs and sponsoring institutions provide clean and private facilities for lactation that have refrigeration capabilities, with proximity appropriate for safe patient care.11 There has been a call to dermatology program leadership to support breastfeeding residents by providing sufficient time and space to pump; a breastfeeding resident will need a 20- to 30-minute break to express milk approximately every 3 hours during the work day.12 One innovative initiative to meet the ACGME lactation requirement reported by the Kansas University Medical Center Graduate Medical Education program (Kansas City, Kansas) was the purchase of wearable breast pumps to loan to residents. The benefits of wearable breast pumps are that they are discreet and can allow mothers to express milk inconspicuously while working, can increase milk supply, require less set up and expression time than traditional pumps, and can allow the mother to manage time more efficiently.13 Breastfeeding plans and goals should be discussed with program leadership before return from leave to strategize and anticipate gaps in clinic scheduling to accommodate the lactating resident.

Planning for Childcare

Resident hours can be long and erratic, making choices for childcare difficult. In one survey of female residents, 61% of married or partnered respondents (n=447) were delaying childbearing, and 46% cited lack of access to childcare as a reason.14 Not all dermatology residents are fortunate enough to match to a program near family, but close family support can be an undeniable asset during childrearing and should be weighed heavily when ranking programs. Options for childcare include relying on a stay-at-home spouse or other family member, a live-in or live-out nanny, part-time babysitters, and daycare. It is crucial to have multiple layers and back-up options for childcare available at any given time when working as a resident. Even with a child enrolled in a full-time daycare and a live-in nanny, a daycare closure due to a COVID-19 exposure or sudden medical emergency in the nanny can still leave unpredicted holes in your childcare plan, leaving the resident to potentially miss work to fill the gap. A survey of residents at one institution showed that the most common backup childcare plan for situations in which either the child or the regular caregiver is ill is for the nontrainee parent or spouse to stay home (45%; n=101), with 25% of respondents staying home to care for a sick child themselves, which clearly has an impact on the hospital. The article proposed implementation of on-site or near-site childcare for residents with extended hours or a 24-hour emergency drop-in availability.15 One institution reported success with the development of a departmentally funded childcare supplementation stipend offered to residents to support daycare costs during the first 6 months of a baby’s life.16

Final Thoughts

Due to the competitiveness of the field, dermatology residents are by nature high performing and academically successful. For a high achiever, the idea of potentially disappointing faculty and colleagues by starting a family during residency can be guilt inducing. Concerns about one’s ability to adequately study the breadth of dermatology while simultaneously raising a child can be distressing; however, there are many ways in which motherhood can hone skills to become a better dermatology resident. Through motherhood one can enhance time management skills, increase efficiency, and improve rapport with pediatric patients and trust with their parents/guardians. A dermatology resident may be her own harshest critic, but it is time that the future generation of dermatologists become their own greatest advocates for establishing supportive policies and resources for the successful navigation of motherhood and dermatology residency.

References
  1. ACGME residents and fellows by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/interactive-data/acgme-residents-and-fellows-sex-and-specialty-2019
  2. Mattessich S, Shea K, Whitaker-Worth D. Parenting and female dermatologists’ perceptions of work-life balance. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2017;3:127-130. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2017.04.001
  3. Active physicians by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/workforce/interactive-data/active-physicians-sex-and-specialty-2019
  4. Stentz NC, Griffith KA, Perkins E, et al. Fertility and childbearing among American female physicians. J Womens Health. 2016;25:1059-1065. doi:10.1089/jwh.2015.5638
  5. Infertility. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. Updated March 1, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/
  6. Phelan ST. Sources of stress and support for the pregnant resident. Acad Med. 1992;67:408-410. doi:10.1097/00001888-199206000-00014
  7. Family and Medical Leave Act. US Department of Labor website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla
  8. American Board of Dermatology. Effective July 2021: new family leave policy. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.abderm.org/public/announcements/effective-july-2021-new-family-leave-policy.aspx
  9. Eidelman AI, Schanler RJ, Johnston M, et al. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics. 2012;129:E827-E841. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3552
  10. Peters GW, Kuczmarska-Haas A, Holliday EB, et al. Lactation challenges of resident physicians: results of a national survey. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:762. doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03436-3
  11. Common program requirements (residency) sections I-V table of implementation dates. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidencyImplementationTable.pdf
  12. Gracey LE, Mathes EF, Shinkai K. Supporting breastfeeding mothers during dermatology residency—challenges and best practices. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:117-118. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.3759
  13. McMillin A, Behravesh B, Byrne P, et al. A GME wearable breast pump program: an innovative method to meet ACGME requirements and federal law. J Grad Med Educ. 2021;13:422-423. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-20-01275.1
  14. Stack SW, Jagsi R, Biermann JS, et al. Childbearing decisions in residency: a multicenter survey of female residents. Acad Med. 2020;95:1550-1557. doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003549
  15. Snyder RA, Tarpley MJ, Phillips SE, et al. The case for on-site child care in residency training and afterward. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5:365-367. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-12-00294.1
  16. Key LL. Child care supplementation: aid for residents and advantages for residency programs. J Pediatr. 2008;153:449-450. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.05.028
References
  1. ACGME residents and fellows by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/interactive-data/acgme-residents-and-fellows-sex-and-specialty-2019
  2. Mattessich S, Shea K, Whitaker-Worth D. Parenting and female dermatologists’ perceptions of work-life balance. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2017;3:127-130. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2017.04.001
  3. Active physicians by sex and specialty, 2019. Association of American Medical Colleges website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/workforce/interactive-data/active-physicians-sex-and-specialty-2019
  4. Stentz NC, Griffith KA, Perkins E, et al. Fertility and childbearing among American female physicians. J Womens Health. 2016;25:1059-1065. doi:10.1089/jwh.2015.5638
  5. Infertility. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. Updated March 1, 2022. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/
  6. Phelan ST. Sources of stress and support for the pregnant resident. Acad Med. 1992;67:408-410. doi:10.1097/00001888-199206000-00014
  7. Family and Medical Leave Act. US Department of Labor website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla
  8. American Board of Dermatology. Effective July 2021: new family leave policy. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.abderm.org/public/announcements/effective-july-2021-new-family-leave-policy.aspx
  9. Eidelman AI, Schanler RJ, Johnston M, et al. Breastfeeding and the use of human milk. Pediatrics. 2012;129:E827-E841. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3552
  10. Peters GW, Kuczmarska-Haas A, Holliday EB, et al. Lactation challenges of resident physicians: results of a national survey. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:762. doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03436-3
  11. Common program requirements (residency) sections I-V table of implementation dates. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education website. Accessed April 21, 2022. https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/PFAssets/ProgramRequirements/CPRResidencyImplementationTable.pdf
  12. Gracey LE, Mathes EF, Shinkai K. Supporting breastfeeding mothers during dermatology residency—challenges and best practices. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156:117-118. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.3759
  13. McMillin A, Behravesh B, Byrne P, et al. A GME wearable breast pump program: an innovative method to meet ACGME requirements and federal law. J Grad Med Educ. 2021;13:422-423. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-20-01275.1
  14. Stack SW, Jagsi R, Biermann JS, et al. Childbearing decisions in residency: a multicenter survey of female residents. Acad Med. 2020;95:1550-1557. doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003549
  15. Snyder RA, Tarpley MJ, Phillips SE, et al. The case for on-site child care in residency training and afterward. J Grad Med Educ. 2013;5:365-367. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-12-00294.1
  16. Key LL. Child care supplementation: aid for residents and advantages for residency programs. J Pediatr. 2008;153:449-450. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.05.028
Issue
Cutis - 109(5)
Issue
Cutis - 109(5)
Page Number
E16-E18
Page Number
E16-E18
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Navigating Motherhood and Dermatology Residency
Display Headline
Navigating Motherhood and Dermatology Residency
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Female dermatology residents seeking motherhood during training have many obstacles to navigate, including the timing of pregnancy, maternity leave scheduling, planning for breastfeeding while working, and arranging for childcare. With supportive policies and resources, motherhood and dermatology training can be rewarding complements to one another.
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

How Dermatology Residents Can Best Serve the Needs of the LGBT Community

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 05/06/2022 - 14:22
Display Headline
How Dermatology Residents Can Best Serve the Needs of the LGBT Community

The chances are good that at least one patient you saw today could have been provided a better environment to foster your patient-physician relationship. A 2020 Gallup poll revealed that an estimated 5.6% of US adults identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT).1 Based on the estimated US population of 331.7 million individuals on December 3, 2020, this means that approximately 18.6 million identified as LGBT and could potentially require health care services.2 These numbers highlight the increasing need within the medical community to provide quality and accessible care to the LGBT community, and dermatologists have a role to play. They treat conditions that are apparent to the patient and others around them, attracting those that may not be motivated to see different physicians. They can not only help with skin diseases that affect all patients but also can train other physicians to screen for some dermatologic diseases that may have a higher prevalence within the LGBT community. Dermatologists have a unique opportunity to help patients better reflect themselves through both surgical and nonsurgical modalities.

Demographics and Definitions

To discuss this topic effectively, it is important to define LGBT terms (Table).3 As a disclaimer, language is fluid. Despite a word or term currently being used and accepted, it quickly can become obsolete. A clinician can always do research, follow the lead of the patient, and respectfully ask questions if there is ever confusion surrounding terminology. Patients do not expect every physician they encounter to be an expert in this subject. What is most important is that patients are approached with an open mind and humility with the goal of providing optimal care.

Glossary of LGBT Terms

Although the federal government now uses the term sexual and gender minorities (SGM), the more specific terms lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender usually are preferred.3,4 Other letters are at times added to the acronym LGBT, including Q for questioning or queer, I for intersex, and A for asexual; all of these letters are under the larger SGM umbrella. Because LGBT is the most commonly used acronym in the daily vernacular, it will be the default for this article.

A term describing sexual orientation does not necessarily describe sexual practices. A woman who identifies as straight may have sex with both men and women, and a gay man may not have sex at all. To be more descriptive regarding sexual practices, one may use the terms men who have sex with men or women who have sex with women.3 Because of this nuance, it is important to elicit a sexual history when speaking to all patients in a forward nonjudgmental manner.

The term transgender is used to describe people whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. Two examples of transgender individuals would be transgender women who were assigned male at birth and transgender men who were assigned female at birth. The term transgender is used in opposition to the term cisgender, which is applied to a person whose gender and sex assigned at birth align.3 When a transgender patient presents to a physician, they may want to discuss methods of gender affirmation or transitioning. These terms encompass any action a person may take to align their body or gender expression with that of the gender they identify with. This could be in the form of gender-affirming hormone therapy (ie, estrogen or testosterone treatment) or gender-affirming surgery (ie, “top” and “bottom” surgeries, in which someone surgically treats their chest or genitals, respectively).3

Creating a Safe Space

The physician is responsible for providing a safe space for patients to disclose medically pertinent information. It is then the job of the dermatologist to be cognizant of health concerns that directly affect the LGBT population and to be prepared if one of these concerns should arise. A safe space consists of both the physical location in which the patient encounter will occur and the people that will be conducting and assisting in the patient encounter. Safe spaces provide a patient with reassurance that they will receive care in a judgement-free location. To create a safe space, both the physical and interpersonal aspects must be addressed to provide an environment that strengthens the patient-physician alliance.

Dermatology residents often spend more time with patients than their attending physicians, providing them the opportunity to foster robust relationships with those served. Although they may not be able to change the physical environment, residents can advocate for patients in their departments and show solidarity in subtle ways. One way to show support for the LGBT community is to publicly display a symbol of solidarity, which could be done by wearing a symbol of support on a white coat lapel. Although there are many designs and styles to choose from, one example is the American Medical Student Association pins that combine the caduceus (a common symbol for medicine) with a rainbow design.5 Whichever symbol is chosen, this small gesture allows patients to immediately know that their physician is an ally. Residents also can encourage their department to add a rainbow flag, a pink triangle, or another symbol somewhere prominent in the check-in area that conveys a message of support.6 Many institutions require residents to perform quality improvement projects. The resident can make a substantial difference in their patients’ experiences by revising their office’s intake forms as a quality improvement project, which can be done by including a section on assigned sex at birth separate from gender.7 When inquiring about gender, in addition to “male” and “female,” a space can be left for people that do not identify with the traditional binary. When asking about sexual orientation, inclusive language options can be provided with additional space for self-identification. Finally, residents can incorporate pronouns below their name in their email signature to normalize this disclosure of information.8 These small changes can have a substantial impact on the health care experience of SGM patients.

 

 

Medical Problems Encountered

The previously described changes can be implemented by residents to provide better care to SGM patients, a group usually considered to be more burdened by physical and psychological diseases.9 Furthermore, dermatologists can provide care for these patients in ways that other physicians cannot. There are special considerations for LGBT patients, as some dermatologic conditions may be more common in this patient population.

Prior studies have shown that men who have sex with men have a higher rate of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin infections, and potentially nonmelanoma skin cancer.10-14 Transgender women also have been found to have higher rates of HIV, in addition to a higher incidence of anal human papillomavirus.15,16 Women who have sex with women have been shown to see physicians less frequently and to be less up to date on their pertinent cancer-related screenings.10,17 Although these associations should not dictate the patient encounter, awareness of them will lead to better patient care. Such awareness also can provide further motivation for dermatologists to discuss safe sexual practices, potential initiation of pre-exposure prophylactic antiretroviral therapy, sun-protective practices, and the importance of following up with a primary physician for examinations and age-specific cancer screening.

Transgender patients may present with unique dermatologic concerns. For transgender male patients, testosterone therapy can cause acne breakouts and androgenetic alopecia. Usually considered worse during the start of treatment, hormone-related acne can be managed with topical retinoids, topical and oral antibiotics, and isotretinoin (if severe).18,19 The iPLEDGE system necessary for prescribing isotretinoin to patients in the United States recently has changed its language to “patients who can get pregnant” and “patients who cannot get pregnant,” following urging by the medical community for inclusivity and progress.20,21 This change creates an inclusive space where registration is no longer centered around gender and instead focuses on the presence of anatomy. Although androgenetic alopecia is a side effect of hormone therapy, it may not be unwanted.18 Discussion about patient desires is important. If the alopecia is unwanted, the Endocrine Society recommends treating cisgender and transgender patients the same in terms of treatment modalities.22

Transgender female patients also can experience dermatologic manifestations of gender-affirming hormone therapy. Melasma may develop secondary to estrogen replacement and can be treated with topical bleaching creams, lasers, and phototherapy.23 Hair removal may be pursued for patients with refractory unwanted body hair, with laser hair removal being the most commonly pursued treatment. Patients also may desire cosmetic procedures, such as botulinum toxin or fillers, to augment their physical appearance.24 Providing these services to patients may allow them to better express themselves and live authentically.

Final Thoughts

There is no way to summarize the experience of everyone within a community. Each person has different thoughts, values, and goals. It also is impossible to encompass every topic that is important for SGM patients. The goal of this article is to empower clinicians to be comfortable discussing issues related to sexuality and gender while also offering resources to learn more, allowing optimal care to be provided to this population. Thus, this article is not comprehensive. There are articles to provide further resources and education, such as the continuing medical education series by Yeung et al10,25 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, as well as organizations within medicine, such as the GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality (https://www.glma.org/), and in dermatology, such as GALDA, the Gay and Lesbian Dermatology Association (https://www.glderm.org/). By providing a safe space for our patients and learning about specific health-related risk factors, dermatologists can provide the best possible care to the LGBT community.

Acknowledgments—I thank Warren R. Heymann, MD (Camden, New Jersey), and Howa Yeung, MD, MSc (Atlanta, Georgia), for their guidance and mentorship in the creation of this article.

References
  1. Jones JM. LGBT identification rises to 5.6% in latest U.S. estimate. Gallup website. Published February 24, 2021. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx
  2. U.S. and world population clock. US Census Bureau website. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://www.census.gov/popclock/
  3. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. LGBTQIA+ glossary of terms for health care teams. Published February 2, 2022. Accessed April 11, 2022. https://www.lgbtqiahealtheducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Glossary-2022.02.22-1.pdf
  4. National Institutes of Health Sexual and Gender Minority Research Coordinating Committee. NIH FY 2016-2020 strategic plan to advance research on the health and well-being of sexual and gender minorities. NIH website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.edi.nih.gov/sites/default/files/EDI_Public_files/sgm-strategic-plan.pdf
  5. Caduceus pin—rainbow. American Medical Student Association website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.amsa.org/member-center/store/Caduceus-Pin-Rainbow-p67375123
  6. 10 tips for caring for LGBTQIA+ patients. Nurse.org website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://nurse.org/articles/culturally-competent-healthcare-for-LGBTQ-patients/
  7. Cartron AM, Raiciulescu S, Trinidad JC. Culturally competent care for LGBT patients in dermatology clinics. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19:786-787.
  8. Wareham J. Should you put pronouns in email signatures and social media bios? Forbes website. Published Dec 30, 2019. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/12/30/should-you-put-pronouns-in-email-signatures-and-social-media-bios/?sh=5b74f1246320
  9. Hafeez H, Zeshan M, Tahir MA, et al. Healthcare disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: a literature review. Cureus. 2017;9:E1184.
  10. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part II. epidemiology, screening, and disease prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:591-602.
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC fact sheet: HIV among gay and bisexual men. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/cdc-msm-508.pdf
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2016. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats16/CDC_2016_STDS_Report-for508WebSep21_2017_1644.pdf
  13. Galindo GR, Casey AJ, Yeung A, et al. Community associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus among New York City men who have sex with men: qualitative research findings and implications for public health practice. J Community Health. 2012;37:458-467.
  14. Blashill AJ. Indoor tanning and skin cancer risk among diverse US youth: results from a national sample. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:344-345.
  15. Herbst JH, Jacobs ED, Finlayson TJ, et al. Estimating HIV prevalence and risk behaviors of transgender persons in the United States: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12:1-17.
  16. Uaamnuichai S, Panyakhamlerd K, Suwan A, et al. Neovaginal and anal high-risk human papillomavirus DNA among Thai transgender women in gender health clinics. Sex Transm Dis. 2021;48:547-549.
  17. Valanis BG, Bowen DJ, Bassford T, et al. Sexual orientation and health: comparisons in the women’s health initiative sample. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:843-853.
  18. Wierckx K, Van de Peer F, Verhaeghe E, et al. Short- and long-term clinical skin effects of testosterone treatment in trans men. J Sex Med. 2014;11:222-229.
  19. Turrion-Merino L, Urech-Garcia-de-la-Vega M, Miguel-Gomez L, et al. Severe acne in female-to-male transgender patients. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1260-1261.
  20. Questions and answers on the iPLEDGE REMS. US Food and Drug Administration website. Published October 12, 2021. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-ipledge-rems#:~:text=The%20modification%20will%20become%20effective,verify%20authorization%20to%20dispense%20isotretinoin
  21. Gao JL, Thoreson N, Dommasch ED. Navigating iPLEDGE enrollment for transgender and gender diverse patients: a guide for providing culturally competent care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:790-791.
  22. Hembree WC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Gooren L, et al. Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102:3869-3903.
  23. Garcia-Rodriguez L, Spiegel JH. Melasma in a transgender woman. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018;39:788-790.
  24. Ginsberg BA, Calderon M, Seminara NM, et al. A potential role for the dermatologist in the physical transformation of transgender people: a survey of attitudes and practices within the transgender community.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:303-308.
  25. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian,gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part I. terminology, demographics, health disparities, and approaches to care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:581-589.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Division of Dermatology, Cooper University Health Care, Camden, New Jersey.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Robert Duffy, MD, 3 Cooper Plaza, Ste 504, Camden, NJ 08103 (Duffy-Robert@cooperhealth.edu).

Issue
Cutis - 109(4)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E14-E17
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Division of Dermatology, Cooper University Health Care, Camden, New Jersey.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Robert Duffy, MD, 3 Cooper Plaza, Ste 504, Camden, NJ 08103 (Duffy-Robert@cooperhealth.edu).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Division of Dermatology, Cooper University Health Care, Camden, New Jersey.

The author reports no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Robert Duffy, MD, 3 Cooper Plaza, Ste 504, Camden, NJ 08103 (Duffy-Robert@cooperhealth.edu).

Article PDF
Article PDF

The chances are good that at least one patient you saw today could have been provided a better environment to foster your patient-physician relationship. A 2020 Gallup poll revealed that an estimated 5.6% of US adults identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT).1 Based on the estimated US population of 331.7 million individuals on December 3, 2020, this means that approximately 18.6 million identified as LGBT and could potentially require health care services.2 These numbers highlight the increasing need within the medical community to provide quality and accessible care to the LGBT community, and dermatologists have a role to play. They treat conditions that are apparent to the patient and others around them, attracting those that may not be motivated to see different physicians. They can not only help with skin diseases that affect all patients but also can train other physicians to screen for some dermatologic diseases that may have a higher prevalence within the LGBT community. Dermatologists have a unique opportunity to help patients better reflect themselves through both surgical and nonsurgical modalities.

Demographics and Definitions

To discuss this topic effectively, it is important to define LGBT terms (Table).3 As a disclaimer, language is fluid. Despite a word or term currently being used and accepted, it quickly can become obsolete. A clinician can always do research, follow the lead of the patient, and respectfully ask questions if there is ever confusion surrounding terminology. Patients do not expect every physician they encounter to be an expert in this subject. What is most important is that patients are approached with an open mind and humility with the goal of providing optimal care.

Glossary of LGBT Terms

Although the federal government now uses the term sexual and gender minorities (SGM), the more specific terms lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender usually are preferred.3,4 Other letters are at times added to the acronym LGBT, including Q for questioning or queer, I for intersex, and A for asexual; all of these letters are under the larger SGM umbrella. Because LGBT is the most commonly used acronym in the daily vernacular, it will be the default for this article.

A term describing sexual orientation does not necessarily describe sexual practices. A woman who identifies as straight may have sex with both men and women, and a gay man may not have sex at all. To be more descriptive regarding sexual practices, one may use the terms men who have sex with men or women who have sex with women.3 Because of this nuance, it is important to elicit a sexual history when speaking to all patients in a forward nonjudgmental manner.

The term transgender is used to describe people whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. Two examples of transgender individuals would be transgender women who were assigned male at birth and transgender men who were assigned female at birth. The term transgender is used in opposition to the term cisgender, which is applied to a person whose gender and sex assigned at birth align.3 When a transgender patient presents to a physician, they may want to discuss methods of gender affirmation or transitioning. These terms encompass any action a person may take to align their body or gender expression with that of the gender they identify with. This could be in the form of gender-affirming hormone therapy (ie, estrogen or testosterone treatment) or gender-affirming surgery (ie, “top” and “bottom” surgeries, in which someone surgically treats their chest or genitals, respectively).3

Creating a Safe Space

The physician is responsible for providing a safe space for patients to disclose medically pertinent information. It is then the job of the dermatologist to be cognizant of health concerns that directly affect the LGBT population and to be prepared if one of these concerns should arise. A safe space consists of both the physical location in which the patient encounter will occur and the people that will be conducting and assisting in the patient encounter. Safe spaces provide a patient with reassurance that they will receive care in a judgement-free location. To create a safe space, both the physical and interpersonal aspects must be addressed to provide an environment that strengthens the patient-physician alliance.

Dermatology residents often spend more time with patients than their attending physicians, providing them the opportunity to foster robust relationships with those served. Although they may not be able to change the physical environment, residents can advocate for patients in their departments and show solidarity in subtle ways. One way to show support for the LGBT community is to publicly display a symbol of solidarity, which could be done by wearing a symbol of support on a white coat lapel. Although there are many designs and styles to choose from, one example is the American Medical Student Association pins that combine the caduceus (a common symbol for medicine) with a rainbow design.5 Whichever symbol is chosen, this small gesture allows patients to immediately know that their physician is an ally. Residents also can encourage their department to add a rainbow flag, a pink triangle, or another symbol somewhere prominent in the check-in area that conveys a message of support.6 Many institutions require residents to perform quality improvement projects. The resident can make a substantial difference in their patients’ experiences by revising their office’s intake forms as a quality improvement project, which can be done by including a section on assigned sex at birth separate from gender.7 When inquiring about gender, in addition to “male” and “female,” a space can be left for people that do not identify with the traditional binary. When asking about sexual orientation, inclusive language options can be provided with additional space for self-identification. Finally, residents can incorporate pronouns below their name in their email signature to normalize this disclosure of information.8 These small changes can have a substantial impact on the health care experience of SGM patients.

 

 

Medical Problems Encountered

The previously described changes can be implemented by residents to provide better care to SGM patients, a group usually considered to be more burdened by physical and psychological diseases.9 Furthermore, dermatologists can provide care for these patients in ways that other physicians cannot. There are special considerations for LGBT patients, as some dermatologic conditions may be more common in this patient population.

Prior studies have shown that men who have sex with men have a higher rate of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin infections, and potentially nonmelanoma skin cancer.10-14 Transgender women also have been found to have higher rates of HIV, in addition to a higher incidence of anal human papillomavirus.15,16 Women who have sex with women have been shown to see physicians less frequently and to be less up to date on their pertinent cancer-related screenings.10,17 Although these associations should not dictate the patient encounter, awareness of them will lead to better patient care. Such awareness also can provide further motivation for dermatologists to discuss safe sexual practices, potential initiation of pre-exposure prophylactic antiretroviral therapy, sun-protective practices, and the importance of following up with a primary physician for examinations and age-specific cancer screening.

Transgender patients may present with unique dermatologic concerns. For transgender male patients, testosterone therapy can cause acne breakouts and androgenetic alopecia. Usually considered worse during the start of treatment, hormone-related acne can be managed with topical retinoids, topical and oral antibiotics, and isotretinoin (if severe).18,19 The iPLEDGE system necessary for prescribing isotretinoin to patients in the United States recently has changed its language to “patients who can get pregnant” and “patients who cannot get pregnant,” following urging by the medical community for inclusivity and progress.20,21 This change creates an inclusive space where registration is no longer centered around gender and instead focuses on the presence of anatomy. Although androgenetic alopecia is a side effect of hormone therapy, it may not be unwanted.18 Discussion about patient desires is important. If the alopecia is unwanted, the Endocrine Society recommends treating cisgender and transgender patients the same in terms of treatment modalities.22

Transgender female patients also can experience dermatologic manifestations of gender-affirming hormone therapy. Melasma may develop secondary to estrogen replacement and can be treated with topical bleaching creams, lasers, and phototherapy.23 Hair removal may be pursued for patients with refractory unwanted body hair, with laser hair removal being the most commonly pursued treatment. Patients also may desire cosmetic procedures, such as botulinum toxin or fillers, to augment their physical appearance.24 Providing these services to patients may allow them to better express themselves and live authentically.

Final Thoughts

There is no way to summarize the experience of everyone within a community. Each person has different thoughts, values, and goals. It also is impossible to encompass every topic that is important for SGM patients. The goal of this article is to empower clinicians to be comfortable discussing issues related to sexuality and gender while also offering resources to learn more, allowing optimal care to be provided to this population. Thus, this article is not comprehensive. There are articles to provide further resources and education, such as the continuing medical education series by Yeung et al10,25 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, as well as organizations within medicine, such as the GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality (https://www.glma.org/), and in dermatology, such as GALDA, the Gay and Lesbian Dermatology Association (https://www.glderm.org/). By providing a safe space for our patients and learning about specific health-related risk factors, dermatologists can provide the best possible care to the LGBT community.

Acknowledgments—I thank Warren R. Heymann, MD (Camden, New Jersey), and Howa Yeung, MD, MSc (Atlanta, Georgia), for their guidance and mentorship in the creation of this article.

The chances are good that at least one patient you saw today could have been provided a better environment to foster your patient-physician relationship. A 2020 Gallup poll revealed that an estimated 5.6% of US adults identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT).1 Based on the estimated US population of 331.7 million individuals on December 3, 2020, this means that approximately 18.6 million identified as LGBT and could potentially require health care services.2 These numbers highlight the increasing need within the medical community to provide quality and accessible care to the LGBT community, and dermatologists have a role to play. They treat conditions that are apparent to the patient and others around them, attracting those that may not be motivated to see different physicians. They can not only help with skin diseases that affect all patients but also can train other physicians to screen for some dermatologic diseases that may have a higher prevalence within the LGBT community. Dermatologists have a unique opportunity to help patients better reflect themselves through both surgical and nonsurgical modalities.

Demographics and Definitions

To discuss this topic effectively, it is important to define LGBT terms (Table).3 As a disclaimer, language is fluid. Despite a word or term currently being used and accepted, it quickly can become obsolete. A clinician can always do research, follow the lead of the patient, and respectfully ask questions if there is ever confusion surrounding terminology. Patients do not expect every physician they encounter to be an expert in this subject. What is most important is that patients are approached with an open mind and humility with the goal of providing optimal care.

Glossary of LGBT Terms

Although the federal government now uses the term sexual and gender minorities (SGM), the more specific terms lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender usually are preferred.3,4 Other letters are at times added to the acronym LGBT, including Q for questioning or queer, I for intersex, and A for asexual; all of these letters are under the larger SGM umbrella. Because LGBT is the most commonly used acronym in the daily vernacular, it will be the default for this article.

A term describing sexual orientation does not necessarily describe sexual practices. A woman who identifies as straight may have sex with both men and women, and a gay man may not have sex at all. To be more descriptive regarding sexual practices, one may use the terms men who have sex with men or women who have sex with women.3 Because of this nuance, it is important to elicit a sexual history when speaking to all patients in a forward nonjudgmental manner.

The term transgender is used to describe people whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. Two examples of transgender individuals would be transgender women who were assigned male at birth and transgender men who were assigned female at birth. The term transgender is used in opposition to the term cisgender, which is applied to a person whose gender and sex assigned at birth align.3 When a transgender patient presents to a physician, they may want to discuss methods of gender affirmation or transitioning. These terms encompass any action a person may take to align their body or gender expression with that of the gender they identify with. This could be in the form of gender-affirming hormone therapy (ie, estrogen or testosterone treatment) or gender-affirming surgery (ie, “top” and “bottom” surgeries, in which someone surgically treats their chest or genitals, respectively).3

Creating a Safe Space

The physician is responsible for providing a safe space for patients to disclose medically pertinent information. It is then the job of the dermatologist to be cognizant of health concerns that directly affect the LGBT population and to be prepared if one of these concerns should arise. A safe space consists of both the physical location in which the patient encounter will occur and the people that will be conducting and assisting in the patient encounter. Safe spaces provide a patient with reassurance that they will receive care in a judgement-free location. To create a safe space, both the physical and interpersonal aspects must be addressed to provide an environment that strengthens the patient-physician alliance.

Dermatology residents often spend more time with patients than their attending physicians, providing them the opportunity to foster robust relationships with those served. Although they may not be able to change the physical environment, residents can advocate for patients in their departments and show solidarity in subtle ways. One way to show support for the LGBT community is to publicly display a symbol of solidarity, which could be done by wearing a symbol of support on a white coat lapel. Although there are many designs and styles to choose from, one example is the American Medical Student Association pins that combine the caduceus (a common symbol for medicine) with a rainbow design.5 Whichever symbol is chosen, this small gesture allows patients to immediately know that their physician is an ally. Residents also can encourage their department to add a rainbow flag, a pink triangle, or another symbol somewhere prominent in the check-in area that conveys a message of support.6 Many institutions require residents to perform quality improvement projects. The resident can make a substantial difference in their patients’ experiences by revising their office’s intake forms as a quality improvement project, which can be done by including a section on assigned sex at birth separate from gender.7 When inquiring about gender, in addition to “male” and “female,” a space can be left for people that do not identify with the traditional binary. When asking about sexual orientation, inclusive language options can be provided with additional space for self-identification. Finally, residents can incorporate pronouns below their name in their email signature to normalize this disclosure of information.8 These small changes can have a substantial impact on the health care experience of SGM patients.

 

 

Medical Problems Encountered

The previously described changes can be implemented by residents to provide better care to SGM patients, a group usually considered to be more burdened by physical and psychological diseases.9 Furthermore, dermatologists can provide care for these patients in ways that other physicians cannot. There are special considerations for LGBT patients, as some dermatologic conditions may be more common in this patient population.

Prior studies have shown that men who have sex with men have a higher rate of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin infections, and potentially nonmelanoma skin cancer.10-14 Transgender women also have been found to have higher rates of HIV, in addition to a higher incidence of anal human papillomavirus.15,16 Women who have sex with women have been shown to see physicians less frequently and to be less up to date on their pertinent cancer-related screenings.10,17 Although these associations should not dictate the patient encounter, awareness of them will lead to better patient care. Such awareness also can provide further motivation for dermatologists to discuss safe sexual practices, potential initiation of pre-exposure prophylactic antiretroviral therapy, sun-protective practices, and the importance of following up with a primary physician for examinations and age-specific cancer screening.

Transgender patients may present with unique dermatologic concerns. For transgender male patients, testosterone therapy can cause acne breakouts and androgenetic alopecia. Usually considered worse during the start of treatment, hormone-related acne can be managed with topical retinoids, topical and oral antibiotics, and isotretinoin (if severe).18,19 The iPLEDGE system necessary for prescribing isotretinoin to patients in the United States recently has changed its language to “patients who can get pregnant” and “patients who cannot get pregnant,” following urging by the medical community for inclusivity and progress.20,21 This change creates an inclusive space where registration is no longer centered around gender and instead focuses on the presence of anatomy. Although androgenetic alopecia is a side effect of hormone therapy, it may not be unwanted.18 Discussion about patient desires is important. If the alopecia is unwanted, the Endocrine Society recommends treating cisgender and transgender patients the same in terms of treatment modalities.22

Transgender female patients also can experience dermatologic manifestations of gender-affirming hormone therapy. Melasma may develop secondary to estrogen replacement and can be treated with topical bleaching creams, lasers, and phototherapy.23 Hair removal may be pursued for patients with refractory unwanted body hair, with laser hair removal being the most commonly pursued treatment. Patients also may desire cosmetic procedures, such as botulinum toxin or fillers, to augment their physical appearance.24 Providing these services to patients may allow them to better express themselves and live authentically.

Final Thoughts

There is no way to summarize the experience of everyone within a community. Each person has different thoughts, values, and goals. It also is impossible to encompass every topic that is important for SGM patients. The goal of this article is to empower clinicians to be comfortable discussing issues related to sexuality and gender while also offering resources to learn more, allowing optimal care to be provided to this population. Thus, this article is not comprehensive. There are articles to provide further resources and education, such as the continuing medical education series by Yeung et al10,25 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, as well as organizations within medicine, such as the GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality (https://www.glma.org/), and in dermatology, such as GALDA, the Gay and Lesbian Dermatology Association (https://www.glderm.org/). By providing a safe space for our patients and learning about specific health-related risk factors, dermatologists can provide the best possible care to the LGBT community.

Acknowledgments—I thank Warren R. Heymann, MD (Camden, New Jersey), and Howa Yeung, MD, MSc (Atlanta, Georgia), for their guidance and mentorship in the creation of this article.

References
  1. Jones JM. LGBT identification rises to 5.6% in latest U.S. estimate. Gallup website. Published February 24, 2021. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx
  2. U.S. and world population clock. US Census Bureau website. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://www.census.gov/popclock/
  3. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. LGBTQIA+ glossary of terms for health care teams. Published February 2, 2022. Accessed April 11, 2022. https://www.lgbtqiahealtheducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Glossary-2022.02.22-1.pdf
  4. National Institutes of Health Sexual and Gender Minority Research Coordinating Committee. NIH FY 2016-2020 strategic plan to advance research on the health and well-being of sexual and gender minorities. NIH website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.edi.nih.gov/sites/default/files/EDI_Public_files/sgm-strategic-plan.pdf
  5. Caduceus pin—rainbow. American Medical Student Association website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.amsa.org/member-center/store/Caduceus-Pin-Rainbow-p67375123
  6. 10 tips for caring for LGBTQIA+ patients. Nurse.org website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://nurse.org/articles/culturally-competent-healthcare-for-LGBTQ-patients/
  7. Cartron AM, Raiciulescu S, Trinidad JC. Culturally competent care for LGBT patients in dermatology clinics. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19:786-787.
  8. Wareham J. Should you put pronouns in email signatures and social media bios? Forbes website. Published Dec 30, 2019. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/12/30/should-you-put-pronouns-in-email-signatures-and-social-media-bios/?sh=5b74f1246320
  9. Hafeez H, Zeshan M, Tahir MA, et al. Healthcare disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: a literature review. Cureus. 2017;9:E1184.
  10. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part II. epidemiology, screening, and disease prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:591-602.
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC fact sheet: HIV among gay and bisexual men. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/cdc-msm-508.pdf
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2016. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats16/CDC_2016_STDS_Report-for508WebSep21_2017_1644.pdf
  13. Galindo GR, Casey AJ, Yeung A, et al. Community associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus among New York City men who have sex with men: qualitative research findings and implications for public health practice. J Community Health. 2012;37:458-467.
  14. Blashill AJ. Indoor tanning and skin cancer risk among diverse US youth: results from a national sample. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:344-345.
  15. Herbst JH, Jacobs ED, Finlayson TJ, et al. Estimating HIV prevalence and risk behaviors of transgender persons in the United States: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12:1-17.
  16. Uaamnuichai S, Panyakhamlerd K, Suwan A, et al. Neovaginal and anal high-risk human papillomavirus DNA among Thai transgender women in gender health clinics. Sex Transm Dis. 2021;48:547-549.
  17. Valanis BG, Bowen DJ, Bassford T, et al. Sexual orientation and health: comparisons in the women’s health initiative sample. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:843-853.
  18. Wierckx K, Van de Peer F, Verhaeghe E, et al. Short- and long-term clinical skin effects of testosterone treatment in trans men. J Sex Med. 2014;11:222-229.
  19. Turrion-Merino L, Urech-Garcia-de-la-Vega M, Miguel-Gomez L, et al. Severe acne in female-to-male transgender patients. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1260-1261.
  20. Questions and answers on the iPLEDGE REMS. US Food and Drug Administration website. Published October 12, 2021. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-ipledge-rems#:~:text=The%20modification%20will%20become%20effective,verify%20authorization%20to%20dispense%20isotretinoin
  21. Gao JL, Thoreson N, Dommasch ED. Navigating iPLEDGE enrollment for transgender and gender diverse patients: a guide for providing culturally competent care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:790-791.
  22. Hembree WC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Gooren L, et al. Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102:3869-3903.
  23. Garcia-Rodriguez L, Spiegel JH. Melasma in a transgender woman. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018;39:788-790.
  24. Ginsberg BA, Calderon M, Seminara NM, et al. A potential role for the dermatologist in the physical transformation of transgender people: a survey of attitudes and practices within the transgender community.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:303-308.
  25. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian,gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part I. terminology, demographics, health disparities, and approaches to care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:581-589.
References
  1. Jones JM. LGBT identification rises to 5.6% in latest U.S. estimate. Gallup website. Published February 24, 2021. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx
  2. U.S. and world population clock. US Census Bureau website. Accessed March 22, 2022. https://www.census.gov/popclock/
  3. National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center. LGBTQIA+ glossary of terms for health care teams. Published February 2, 2022. Accessed April 11, 2022. https://www.lgbtqiahealtheducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Glossary-2022.02.22-1.pdf
  4. National Institutes of Health Sexual and Gender Minority Research Coordinating Committee. NIH FY 2016-2020 strategic plan to advance research on the health and well-being of sexual and gender minorities. NIH website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.edi.nih.gov/sites/default/files/EDI_Public_files/sgm-strategic-plan.pdf
  5. Caduceus pin—rainbow. American Medical Student Association website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.amsa.org/member-center/store/Caduceus-Pin-Rainbow-p67375123
  6. 10 tips for caring for LGBTQIA+ patients. Nurse.org website. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://nurse.org/articles/culturally-competent-healthcare-for-LGBTQ-patients/
  7. Cartron AM, Raiciulescu S, Trinidad JC. Culturally competent care for LGBT patients in dermatology clinics. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19:786-787.
  8. Wareham J. Should you put pronouns in email signatures and social media bios? Forbes website. Published Dec 30, 2019. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2020/12/30/should-you-put-pronouns-in-email-signatures-and-social-media-bios/?sh=5b74f1246320
  9. Hafeez H, Zeshan M, Tahir MA, et al. Healthcare disparities among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: a literature review. Cureus. 2017;9:E1184.
  10. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part II. epidemiology, screening, and disease prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:591-602.
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC fact sheet: HIV among gay and bisexual men. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/cdc-msm-508.pdf
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2016. CDC website. Accessed April 14, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats16/CDC_2016_STDS_Report-for508WebSep21_2017_1644.pdf
  13. Galindo GR, Casey AJ, Yeung A, et al. Community associated methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus among New York City men who have sex with men: qualitative research findings and implications for public health practice. J Community Health. 2012;37:458-467.
  14. Blashill AJ. Indoor tanning and skin cancer risk among diverse US youth: results from a national sample. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:344-345.
  15. Herbst JH, Jacobs ED, Finlayson TJ, et al. Estimating HIV prevalence and risk behaviors of transgender persons in the United States: a systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2008;12:1-17.
  16. Uaamnuichai S, Panyakhamlerd K, Suwan A, et al. Neovaginal and anal high-risk human papillomavirus DNA among Thai transgender women in gender health clinics. Sex Transm Dis. 2021;48:547-549.
  17. Valanis BG, Bowen DJ, Bassford T, et al. Sexual orientation and health: comparisons in the women’s health initiative sample. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:843-853.
  18. Wierckx K, Van de Peer F, Verhaeghe E, et al. Short- and long-term clinical skin effects of testosterone treatment in trans men. J Sex Med. 2014;11:222-229.
  19. Turrion-Merino L, Urech-Garcia-de-la-Vega M, Miguel-Gomez L, et al. Severe acne in female-to-male transgender patients. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:1260-1261.
  20. Questions and answers on the iPLEDGE REMS. US Food and Drug Administration website. Published October 12, 2021. Accessed March 23, 2022. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/questions-and-answers-ipledge-rems#:~:text=The%20modification%20will%20become%20effective,verify%20authorization%20to%20dispense%20isotretinoin
  21. Gao JL, Thoreson N, Dommasch ED. Navigating iPLEDGE enrollment for transgender and gender diverse patients: a guide for providing culturally competent care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:790-791.
  22. Hembree WC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Gooren L, et al. Endocrine treatment of gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102:3869-3903.
  23. Garcia-Rodriguez L, Spiegel JH. Melasma in a transgender woman. Am J Otolaryngol. 2018;39:788-790.
  24. Ginsberg BA, Calderon M, Seminara NM, et al. A potential role for the dermatologist in the physical transformation of transgender people: a survey of attitudes and practices within the transgender community.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:303-308.
  25. Yeung H, Luk KM, Chen SC, et al. Dermatologic care for lesbian,gay, bisexual, and transgender persons. part I. terminology, demographics, health disparities, and approaches to care. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:581-589.
Issue
Cutis - 109(4)
Issue
Cutis - 109(4)
Page Number
E14-E17
Page Number
E14-E17
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
How Dermatology Residents Can Best Serve the Needs of the LGBT Community
Display Headline
How Dermatology Residents Can Best Serve the Needs of the LGBT Community
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Because of the longitudinal relationships dermatology residents make with their patients, they have a unique opportunity to provide a safe space and life-changing care to patients within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.
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

Borderline personality disorder: Remember empathy and compassion

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 05/02/2022 - 00:15
Display Headline
Borderline personality disorder: Remember empathy and compassion

Oh, great!” a senior resident sardonically remarked with a smirk as they read up on the next patient in the clinic. “A borderline patient. Get ready for a rough one ... Ugh.”

Before ever stepping foot into the patient’s room, this resident had prematurely established and demonstrated an unfortunate dynamic for any student or trainee within earshot. This is an all-too-familiar occurrence when caring for individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD), or any other patients deemed to be “difficult.” The patient, however, likely walked into the room with a traumatic past that they continue to suffer from, in addition to any other issues for which they were seeking care.

Consider what these patients have experienced

A typical profile of these resilient patients with BPD: They were born emotionally sensitive. They grew up in homes with caretakers who knowingly or unknowingly invalidated their complaints about having their feelings hurt, about being abused emotionally, sexually, or otherwise, or about their worries concerning their interactions with peers at school. These caretakers may have been frightening and unpredictable, randomly showing affection or arbitrarily punishing for any perceived misstep, which led these patients to develop (for their own safety’s sake) a hypersensitivity to the affect of others. Their wariness and distrust of their social surroundings may have led to a skeptical view of kindness from others. Over time, without any guidance from prior demonstrations of healthy coping skills or interpersonal outlets from their caregivers, the emotional pressure builds. This pressure finally erupts in the form of impulsivity, self-harm, desperation, and defensiveness—in other words, survival. This is often followed by these patients’ first experience with receiving some degree of appropriate response to their complaints—their first experience with feeling seen and heard by their caretakers. They learn that their needs are met only when they cry out in desperation.1-3

These patients typically bring these maladaptive coping skills with them into adulthood, which often leads to a series of intense, unhealthy, and short-lived interpersonal and professional connections. They desire healthy, lasting connections with others, but through no fault of their own are unable to appropriately manage the normal stressors therein.1 Often, these patients do not know of their eventual BPD diagnosis, or even reject it due to its ever-negative valence. For other patients, receiving a personality disorder diagnosis is incredibly validating because they are no longer alone regarding this type of suffering, and a doctor—a caretaker—is finally making sense of this tumultuous world.

The countertransference of frustration, anxiety, doubt, and annoyance we may feel when caring for patients with BPD pales in comparison to living in their shoes and carrying the weight of what they have had to endure before presenting to our care. As these resilient patients wait in the exam room for the chance to be heard, let this be a reminder to greet them with the patience, understanding, empathy, and compassion that physicians are known to embody.

Suggestions for working with ‘difficult’ patients

The following tips may be helpful for building rapport with patients with BPD or other “difficult” patients:

  • validate their complaints, and the difficulties they cause
  • be genuine and honest when discussing their complaints
  • acknowledge your own mistakes and misunderstandings in their care
  • don’t be defensive—accept criticism with an open mind
  • practice listening with intent, and reflective listening
  • set ground rules and stick to them (eg, time limits, prescribing expectations, patient-physician relationship boundaries)
  • educate and support the patient and their loved ones.
References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013:947.
2. Porter C, Palmier-Claus J, Branitsky A, et al. Childhood adversity and borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2020;141(1):6-20.
3. Sansone RA, Sansone LA. Emotional hyper-reactivity in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry (Edgmont). 2010;7(9):16-20.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Collins is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
e1-e2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Collins is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Collins is a PGY-2 Psychiatry Resident, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.

Disclosures
The author reports no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in the article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Oh, great!” a senior resident sardonically remarked with a smirk as they read up on the next patient in the clinic. “A borderline patient. Get ready for a rough one ... Ugh.”

Before ever stepping foot into the patient’s room, this resident had prematurely established and demonstrated an unfortunate dynamic for any student or trainee within earshot. This is an all-too-familiar occurrence when caring for individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD), or any other patients deemed to be “difficult.” The patient, however, likely walked into the room with a traumatic past that they continue to suffer from, in addition to any other issues for which they were seeking care.

Consider what these patients have experienced

A typical profile of these resilient patients with BPD: They were born emotionally sensitive. They grew up in homes with caretakers who knowingly or unknowingly invalidated their complaints about having their feelings hurt, about being abused emotionally, sexually, or otherwise, or about their worries concerning their interactions with peers at school. These caretakers may have been frightening and unpredictable, randomly showing affection or arbitrarily punishing for any perceived misstep, which led these patients to develop (for their own safety’s sake) a hypersensitivity to the affect of others. Their wariness and distrust of their social surroundings may have led to a skeptical view of kindness from others. Over time, without any guidance from prior demonstrations of healthy coping skills or interpersonal outlets from their caregivers, the emotional pressure builds. This pressure finally erupts in the form of impulsivity, self-harm, desperation, and defensiveness—in other words, survival. This is often followed by these patients’ first experience with receiving some degree of appropriate response to their complaints—their first experience with feeling seen and heard by their caretakers. They learn that their needs are met only when they cry out in desperation.1-3

These patients typically bring these maladaptive coping skills with them into adulthood, which often leads to a series of intense, unhealthy, and short-lived interpersonal and professional connections. They desire healthy, lasting connections with others, but through no fault of their own are unable to appropriately manage the normal stressors therein.1 Often, these patients do not know of their eventual BPD diagnosis, or even reject it due to its ever-negative valence. For other patients, receiving a personality disorder diagnosis is incredibly validating because they are no longer alone regarding this type of suffering, and a doctor—a caretaker—is finally making sense of this tumultuous world.

The countertransference of frustration, anxiety, doubt, and annoyance we may feel when caring for patients with BPD pales in comparison to living in their shoes and carrying the weight of what they have had to endure before presenting to our care. As these resilient patients wait in the exam room for the chance to be heard, let this be a reminder to greet them with the patience, understanding, empathy, and compassion that physicians are known to embody.

Suggestions for working with ‘difficult’ patients

The following tips may be helpful for building rapport with patients with BPD or other “difficult” patients:

  • validate their complaints, and the difficulties they cause
  • be genuine and honest when discussing their complaints
  • acknowledge your own mistakes and misunderstandings in their care
  • don’t be defensive—accept criticism with an open mind
  • practice listening with intent, and reflective listening
  • set ground rules and stick to them (eg, time limits, prescribing expectations, patient-physician relationship boundaries)
  • educate and support the patient and their loved ones.

Oh, great!” a senior resident sardonically remarked with a smirk as they read up on the next patient in the clinic. “A borderline patient. Get ready for a rough one ... Ugh.”

Before ever stepping foot into the patient’s room, this resident had prematurely established and demonstrated an unfortunate dynamic for any student or trainee within earshot. This is an all-too-familiar occurrence when caring for individuals with borderline personality disorder (BPD), or any other patients deemed to be “difficult.” The patient, however, likely walked into the room with a traumatic past that they continue to suffer from, in addition to any other issues for which they were seeking care.

Consider what these patients have experienced

A typical profile of these resilient patients with BPD: They were born emotionally sensitive. They grew up in homes with caretakers who knowingly or unknowingly invalidated their complaints about having their feelings hurt, about being abused emotionally, sexually, or otherwise, or about their worries concerning their interactions with peers at school. These caretakers may have been frightening and unpredictable, randomly showing affection or arbitrarily punishing for any perceived misstep, which led these patients to develop (for their own safety’s sake) a hypersensitivity to the affect of others. Their wariness and distrust of their social surroundings may have led to a skeptical view of kindness from others. Over time, without any guidance from prior demonstrations of healthy coping skills or interpersonal outlets from their caregivers, the emotional pressure builds. This pressure finally erupts in the form of impulsivity, self-harm, desperation, and defensiveness—in other words, survival. This is often followed by these patients’ first experience with receiving some degree of appropriate response to their complaints—their first experience with feeling seen and heard by their caretakers. They learn that their needs are met only when they cry out in desperation.1-3

These patients typically bring these maladaptive coping skills with them into adulthood, which often leads to a series of intense, unhealthy, and short-lived interpersonal and professional connections. They desire healthy, lasting connections with others, but through no fault of their own are unable to appropriately manage the normal stressors therein.1 Often, these patients do not know of their eventual BPD diagnosis, or even reject it due to its ever-negative valence. For other patients, receiving a personality disorder diagnosis is incredibly validating because they are no longer alone regarding this type of suffering, and a doctor—a caretaker—is finally making sense of this tumultuous world.

The countertransference of frustration, anxiety, doubt, and annoyance we may feel when caring for patients with BPD pales in comparison to living in their shoes and carrying the weight of what they have had to endure before presenting to our care. As these resilient patients wait in the exam room for the chance to be heard, let this be a reminder to greet them with the patience, understanding, empathy, and compassion that physicians are known to embody.

Suggestions for working with ‘difficult’ patients

The following tips may be helpful for building rapport with patients with BPD or other “difficult” patients:

  • validate their complaints, and the difficulties they cause
  • be genuine and honest when discussing their complaints
  • acknowledge your own mistakes and misunderstandings in their care
  • don’t be defensive—accept criticism with an open mind
  • practice listening with intent, and reflective listening
  • set ground rules and stick to them (eg, time limits, prescribing expectations, patient-physician relationship boundaries)
  • educate and support the patient and their loved ones.
References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013:947.
2. Porter C, Palmier-Claus J, Branitsky A, et al. Childhood adversity and borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2020;141(1):6-20.
3. Sansone RA, Sansone LA. Emotional hyper-reactivity in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry (Edgmont). 2010;7(9):16-20.

References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013:947.
2. Porter C, Palmier-Claus J, Branitsky A, et al. Childhood adversity and borderline personality disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2020;141(1):6-20.
3. Sansone RA, Sansone LA. Emotional hyper-reactivity in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry (Edgmont). 2010;7(9):16-20.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Page Number
e1-e2
Page Number
e1-e2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Borderline personality disorder: Remember empathy and compassion
Display Headline
Borderline personality disorder: Remember empathy and compassion
Sections
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

Navigating the Evolving Landscape of the Dermatologic Workforce

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/05/2022 - 15:23
Display Headline
Navigating the Evolving Landscape of the Dermatologic Workforce

As of 2018, the mean dermatologist to population ratio in the United States was 1.10 per 100,000 people, highlighting a shortage of dermatologists that is only predicted to increase in coming years.1-4 This undersupply is fueled by both an increasing burden of dermatologic disease and population growth.4 Without readily available access to dermatologic care, many patients are left waiting for weeks to see a dermatologist, depending on geographic region.5-7 It is not simply patients who perceive wait times to be prolonged; approximately half of dermatologists surveyed by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) reported an undersupply of dermatologists in their communities, a finding that strongly correlated with patient wait times.2 Ensuring the dermatologic workforce is sufficient to fulfill patient needs requires innovation of current practice models. To address this unmet demand, many practices have begun incorporating physician extenders, a term that encompasses physicians not board certified in dermatology, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners.7 The evolving landscape of the dermatologic workforce raises questions about future practice models and patient outcomes.

Scope of Practice for Physician Extenders

In practice, the role of physician extenders is highly variable. Legislation involving the scope of practice for physician extenders constantly is changing and varies by state. As of November 2021, 24 states and the District of Columbia permit nurse practitioners “full practice” authority to triage patients, interpret diagnostic tests, and prescribe treatments without physician oversight, including controlled substances.8,9 Even in states with “reduced practice” and “restricted practice” paradigms, which necessitate physician oversight, there remains ambiguity. Across the country, state regulatory bodies differ in statues governing licensing requirements, accessibility of the supervising physician, and ultimately culpability in the case of patient harm. Lack of consensus guidelines that clearly define roles and responsibilities has kindled controversy regarding extent of autonomy and liability for adverse outcomes.10,11

With respect to procedures, the AAD has explicitly recommended that “only active and properly licensed doctors of medicine and osteopathy shall engage in the practice of medicine” but that “under appropriate circumstances, a physician may delegate certain procedures and services to appropriately trained nonphysician office personnel.”12 This statement does not refer to or explicitly list the procedures that are appropriate for delegation to nonphysician personnel, and there is wide variability in how this recommendation is applied in daily practice. As it was originally intended, the AAD’s “Ethics in Medical Practice” position statement indicated that dermatologists must directly oversee physician extenders, a responsibility that is defined as being “present on-site, immediately available and able to respond promptly” to issues arising during the provision of health care services.12

Adverse Events From Cosmetic Procedures

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery has documented a steady growth in the demand for cosmetic, medical, and surgical services,13 a trend that has heralded an increase in the number of procedures performed by physician extenders.14,15 One study contrasted the risk for adverse events following minimally invasive cosmetic procedures performed by physicians or nonphysicians. Of 2116 patients surveyed, 50 adverse events were documented.14 The cohort treated by nonphysicians experienced a higher incidence of laser burns and dyspigmentation, and the use of improper technique was the most frequently implicated cause of developing an adverse event. Approximately 24.6% of American Society for Dermatologic Surgery members reported treating 10 or more complications of cosmetic procedures performed by nonphysicians.14 Beyond laser burns and dyspigmentation, this wide range of complications included inappropriately placed filler product, facial drooping, and scarring. These studies highlight the need for further investigation into the outcomes of procedures performed by physician extenders.

Training of Physician Extenders

Even with medical management, emphasis on proper training of personnel is key and remains a legitimate concern. The training of physician extenders in dermatology differs greatly by location; while some physician extenders operate under meticulous guidance and thus can expand their skill set, other physician extenders shadow dermatologists for an arbitrary amount of time before being thrust into practice.10 It would be a disservice to both patients and nonphysician providers alike to conflate the latter regimen with the 4 years of medical school, 1 year of internship, and 3 years of rigorous specialized dermatologic training that physicians undergo.

This stark discrepancy between the training of physicians and physician extenders raises difficult questions about the patient’s right to make an informed decision regarding how they receive health care. Indeed, the casually regulated autonomous practice of some nonphysician providers has ignited public shock and ire.11

Reducing Health Care Expenditures

As legislatures deliberate over expanding scope of practice, policies should be based on evidence that prioritizes patient safety. In the appropriate setting, physician extenders can be instrumental to mitigating health care disparities; the use of physician extenders can diminish wait times for patients with routine visits for stable dermatologic disease.16 Moreover, reducing health care expenditures often is cited as a major benefit of increased utilization of physician extenders.14 It stands to reason that compensation of nonphysician providers is less expensive for a practice compared with physicians. Physician extenders participating in the management of stable chronic conditions or mild acute conditions may be cost-efficient in these circumstances; however, evidence suggests that physician extenders may incur greater costs than physicians with respect to the utilization of diagnostic tests or prescribing medications. For example, several studies have documented a substantial difference in the number of biopsies needed per malignant neoplasm by physicians compared to physician extenders.17-19 Particularly in patients younger than 65 years and in patients without history of skin cancer, physician extenders had to perform a greater number of biopsies to diagnose malignant neoplasms vs physicians.18 In addition to increased utilization of diagnostic tests, nonphysician providers more frequently prescribe medications of varying classes.20-22 Whether in outpatient offices, emergency departments, or hospital clinics, physician extenders more frequently prescribe antibiotics, which has concerning implications for antibiotic stewardship.20,21 In states with independent prescription authority, physician extenders are more than 20 times more likely to overprescribeopioids compared to physician extenders in states requiring physician supervision.23 These findings warrant additional investigation into how prescription patterns vary by provider type and how these differences impact patient outcomes.

Final Thoughts

Improving patient care is inherently a team endeavor, and the contributions of all members of the health care team are critical to success. Engaging physician extenders may help mitigate disparities in dermatologic care, with respect to surveillance of stable chronic conditions or the diagnosis of mild acute diseases. However, the exact scope of practice of physician extenders remains ambiguous, and their training regimens can vary drastically. Therefore, in the interest of patient safety, new patients or medically complex patients (ie, cutaneous lymphomas, nonstable autoimmune connective tissue disease) should be examined and managed by physicians. In either scenario, the patient should be informed of which providers are available and should be integrated into the decision-making process for their care. Through mutual respect, close collaboration, and candid assessments of patient complexity, different parties within the medical team can unite behind the mission to improve patient outcomes and champion equitable access to health care.

References
  1. Vaidya T, Zubritsky L, Alikhan A, et al. Socioeconomic and geographic barriers to dermatology care in urban and rural US populations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:406-408.
  2. Resneck J Jr, Kimball AB. The dermatology workforce shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:50-54.
  3. American Medical Association. Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the US. American Medical Association; 2002.
  4. Kimball AB, Resneck JS Jr. The US dermatology workforce: a specialty remains in shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;59:741-755.
  5. Tsang MW, Resneck JS Jr. Even patients with changing moles face long dermatology appointment wait-times: a study of simulated patient calls to dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;55:54-58.
  6. Suneja T, Smith ED, Chen GJ, et al. Waiting times to see a dermatologist are perceived as too long by dermatologists: implications for the dermatology workforce. Arch Dermatol. 2001;137:1303-1307.
  7. Zurfley F Jr, Mostow EN. Association between the use of a physician extender and dermatology appointment wait times in Ohio. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:1323-1324.
  8. Bean M. NP practice authority by state. Becker’s Hospital Review website. Published April 8, 2021. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/nursing/np-practice-authority-by-state.html
  9. States with full practice authority for nurse practitioners. Maryville University website. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://online.maryville.edu/nursing-degrees/np/resources/states-granting-np-full-practice-authority/
  10. Slade K, Lazenby M, Grant-Kels JM. Ethics of utilizing nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants in the dermatology setting. Clin Dermatol. 2012;30:516-521
  11. Hafner K, Palmer G. Skin cancers rise, along with questionable treatments. New York Times. November 20, 2017. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/health/dermatology-skin-cancer.html
  12. American Academy of Dermatology. Policy #P-61.500. the use of non-physician office personnel. Published February 22, 2002. Updated July 31, 2004. http://www.aad.org/Forms/Policies/Uploads/AR/COE%20-%20Ethics%20in%20Medical%20Practice%20Booklet.pdf
  13. 2016 ASDS Survey on Dermatologic Procedures. American Society for Dermatologic Surgery website. Published May 30, 2017. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://www.asds.net/skin-experts/news-room/press-releases/asds-survey-nearly-105-million-treatments-performed-in-2016
  14. Rossi AM, Wilson B, Hibler BP, et al. Nonphysician practice of cosmetic dermatology: a patient and physician perspective of outcomes and adverse events. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:588-597. 
  15. Anderson AM, Matsumoto M, Saul MI, et al. Accuracy of skin cancer diagnosis by physician assistants compared with dermatologists in a large health care system. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:569-573.
  16. O’Brien JC, Chong BF. Reducing outpatient dermatology clinic wait times in a safety net health system in Dallas, Texas. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:631-632.
  17. Aldredge LM, Young MS. Providing guidance for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who are candidates for biologic therapy: role of the nurse practitioner and physician assistant. J Dermatol Nurses Assoc. 2016;8:14-26.
  18. Roblin DW, Howard DH, Becker ER, et al. Use of midlevel practitioners to achieve labor cost savings in the primary care practice of an MCO. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:607-626.
  19. Nault A, Zhang C, Kim K, et al. Biopsy use in skin cancer diagnosis: comparing dermatology physicians and advanced practice professionals. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:899-902.
  20. Privalle A, Havighurst T, Kim K, et al. Number of skin biopsies needed per malignancy: comparing the use of skin biopsies among dermatologists and nondermatologist clinicians [published online August 10, 2019]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:110-116.
  21. Roumie CL, Halasa NB, Edwards KM, et al. Differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians, residents, and nonphysician clinicians. Am J Med. 2005;118:641-648.
  22. Sanchez GV, Hersh AL, Shapiro DJ, et al. Outpatient antibiotic prescribing among United States nurse practitioners and physician assistants [published online August 10, 2016]. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2016;3:ofw168.
  23. Lozada MJ, Raji MA, Goodwin JS, et al. Opioid prescribing by primary care providers: a cross-sectional analysis of nurse practitioner, physician assistant, and physician prescribing patterns [published online April 24, 2020]. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2584-2592.
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 (swazzawi@gmail.com).

Issue
Cutis - 108(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E17-E19
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 (swazzawi@gmail.com).

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 (swazzawi@gmail.com).

Article PDF
Article PDF

As of 2018, the mean dermatologist to population ratio in the United States was 1.10 per 100,000 people, highlighting a shortage of dermatologists that is only predicted to increase in coming years.1-4 This undersupply is fueled by both an increasing burden of dermatologic disease and population growth.4 Without readily available access to dermatologic care, many patients are left waiting for weeks to see a dermatologist, depending on geographic region.5-7 It is not simply patients who perceive wait times to be prolonged; approximately half of dermatologists surveyed by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) reported an undersupply of dermatologists in their communities, a finding that strongly correlated with patient wait times.2 Ensuring the dermatologic workforce is sufficient to fulfill patient needs requires innovation of current practice models. To address this unmet demand, many practices have begun incorporating physician extenders, a term that encompasses physicians not board certified in dermatology, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners.7 The evolving landscape of the dermatologic workforce raises questions about future practice models and patient outcomes.

Scope of Practice for Physician Extenders

In practice, the role of physician extenders is highly variable. Legislation involving the scope of practice for physician extenders constantly is changing and varies by state. As of November 2021, 24 states and the District of Columbia permit nurse practitioners “full practice” authority to triage patients, interpret diagnostic tests, and prescribe treatments without physician oversight, including controlled substances.8,9 Even in states with “reduced practice” and “restricted practice” paradigms, which necessitate physician oversight, there remains ambiguity. Across the country, state regulatory bodies differ in statues governing licensing requirements, accessibility of the supervising physician, and ultimately culpability in the case of patient harm. Lack of consensus guidelines that clearly define roles and responsibilities has kindled controversy regarding extent of autonomy and liability for adverse outcomes.10,11

With respect to procedures, the AAD has explicitly recommended that “only active and properly licensed doctors of medicine and osteopathy shall engage in the practice of medicine” but that “under appropriate circumstances, a physician may delegate certain procedures and services to appropriately trained nonphysician office personnel.”12 This statement does not refer to or explicitly list the procedures that are appropriate for delegation to nonphysician personnel, and there is wide variability in how this recommendation is applied in daily practice. As it was originally intended, the AAD’s “Ethics in Medical Practice” position statement indicated that dermatologists must directly oversee physician extenders, a responsibility that is defined as being “present on-site, immediately available and able to respond promptly” to issues arising during the provision of health care services.12

Adverse Events From Cosmetic Procedures

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery has documented a steady growth in the demand for cosmetic, medical, and surgical services,13 a trend that has heralded an increase in the number of procedures performed by physician extenders.14,15 One study contrasted the risk for adverse events following minimally invasive cosmetic procedures performed by physicians or nonphysicians. Of 2116 patients surveyed, 50 adverse events were documented.14 The cohort treated by nonphysicians experienced a higher incidence of laser burns and dyspigmentation, and the use of improper technique was the most frequently implicated cause of developing an adverse event. Approximately 24.6% of American Society for Dermatologic Surgery members reported treating 10 or more complications of cosmetic procedures performed by nonphysicians.14 Beyond laser burns and dyspigmentation, this wide range of complications included inappropriately placed filler product, facial drooping, and scarring. These studies highlight the need for further investigation into the outcomes of procedures performed by physician extenders.

Training of Physician Extenders

Even with medical management, emphasis on proper training of personnel is key and remains a legitimate concern. The training of physician extenders in dermatology differs greatly by location; while some physician extenders operate under meticulous guidance and thus can expand their skill set, other physician extenders shadow dermatologists for an arbitrary amount of time before being thrust into practice.10 It would be a disservice to both patients and nonphysician providers alike to conflate the latter regimen with the 4 years of medical school, 1 year of internship, and 3 years of rigorous specialized dermatologic training that physicians undergo.

This stark discrepancy between the training of physicians and physician extenders raises difficult questions about the patient’s right to make an informed decision regarding how they receive health care. Indeed, the casually regulated autonomous practice of some nonphysician providers has ignited public shock and ire.11

Reducing Health Care Expenditures

As legislatures deliberate over expanding scope of practice, policies should be based on evidence that prioritizes patient safety. In the appropriate setting, physician extenders can be instrumental to mitigating health care disparities; the use of physician extenders can diminish wait times for patients with routine visits for stable dermatologic disease.16 Moreover, reducing health care expenditures often is cited as a major benefit of increased utilization of physician extenders.14 It stands to reason that compensation of nonphysician providers is less expensive for a practice compared with physicians. Physician extenders participating in the management of stable chronic conditions or mild acute conditions may be cost-efficient in these circumstances; however, evidence suggests that physician extenders may incur greater costs than physicians with respect to the utilization of diagnostic tests or prescribing medications. For example, several studies have documented a substantial difference in the number of biopsies needed per malignant neoplasm by physicians compared to physician extenders.17-19 Particularly in patients younger than 65 years and in patients without history of skin cancer, physician extenders had to perform a greater number of biopsies to diagnose malignant neoplasms vs physicians.18 In addition to increased utilization of diagnostic tests, nonphysician providers more frequently prescribe medications of varying classes.20-22 Whether in outpatient offices, emergency departments, or hospital clinics, physician extenders more frequently prescribe antibiotics, which has concerning implications for antibiotic stewardship.20,21 In states with independent prescription authority, physician extenders are more than 20 times more likely to overprescribeopioids compared to physician extenders in states requiring physician supervision.23 These findings warrant additional investigation into how prescription patterns vary by provider type and how these differences impact patient outcomes.

Final Thoughts

Improving patient care is inherently a team endeavor, and the contributions of all members of the health care team are critical to success. Engaging physician extenders may help mitigate disparities in dermatologic care, with respect to surveillance of stable chronic conditions or the diagnosis of mild acute diseases. However, the exact scope of practice of physician extenders remains ambiguous, and their training regimens can vary drastically. Therefore, in the interest of patient safety, new patients or medically complex patients (ie, cutaneous lymphomas, nonstable autoimmune connective tissue disease) should be examined and managed by physicians. In either scenario, the patient should be informed of which providers are available and should be integrated into the decision-making process for their care. Through mutual respect, close collaboration, and candid assessments of patient complexity, different parties within the medical team can unite behind the mission to improve patient outcomes and champion equitable access to health care.

As of 2018, the mean dermatologist to population ratio in the United States was 1.10 per 100,000 people, highlighting a shortage of dermatologists that is only predicted to increase in coming years.1-4 This undersupply is fueled by both an increasing burden of dermatologic disease and population growth.4 Without readily available access to dermatologic care, many patients are left waiting for weeks to see a dermatologist, depending on geographic region.5-7 It is not simply patients who perceive wait times to be prolonged; approximately half of dermatologists surveyed by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) reported an undersupply of dermatologists in their communities, a finding that strongly correlated with patient wait times.2 Ensuring the dermatologic workforce is sufficient to fulfill patient needs requires innovation of current practice models. To address this unmet demand, many practices have begun incorporating physician extenders, a term that encompasses physicians not board certified in dermatology, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners.7 The evolving landscape of the dermatologic workforce raises questions about future practice models and patient outcomes.

Scope of Practice for Physician Extenders

In practice, the role of physician extenders is highly variable. Legislation involving the scope of practice for physician extenders constantly is changing and varies by state. As of November 2021, 24 states and the District of Columbia permit nurse practitioners “full practice” authority to triage patients, interpret diagnostic tests, and prescribe treatments without physician oversight, including controlled substances.8,9 Even in states with “reduced practice” and “restricted practice” paradigms, which necessitate physician oversight, there remains ambiguity. Across the country, state regulatory bodies differ in statues governing licensing requirements, accessibility of the supervising physician, and ultimately culpability in the case of patient harm. Lack of consensus guidelines that clearly define roles and responsibilities has kindled controversy regarding extent of autonomy and liability for adverse outcomes.10,11

With respect to procedures, the AAD has explicitly recommended that “only active and properly licensed doctors of medicine and osteopathy shall engage in the practice of medicine” but that “under appropriate circumstances, a physician may delegate certain procedures and services to appropriately trained nonphysician office personnel.”12 This statement does not refer to or explicitly list the procedures that are appropriate for delegation to nonphysician personnel, and there is wide variability in how this recommendation is applied in daily practice. As it was originally intended, the AAD’s “Ethics in Medical Practice” position statement indicated that dermatologists must directly oversee physician extenders, a responsibility that is defined as being “present on-site, immediately available and able to respond promptly” to issues arising during the provision of health care services.12

Adverse Events From Cosmetic Procedures

The American Society for Dermatologic Surgery has documented a steady growth in the demand for cosmetic, medical, and surgical services,13 a trend that has heralded an increase in the number of procedures performed by physician extenders.14,15 One study contrasted the risk for adverse events following minimally invasive cosmetic procedures performed by physicians or nonphysicians. Of 2116 patients surveyed, 50 adverse events were documented.14 The cohort treated by nonphysicians experienced a higher incidence of laser burns and dyspigmentation, and the use of improper technique was the most frequently implicated cause of developing an adverse event. Approximately 24.6% of American Society for Dermatologic Surgery members reported treating 10 or more complications of cosmetic procedures performed by nonphysicians.14 Beyond laser burns and dyspigmentation, this wide range of complications included inappropriately placed filler product, facial drooping, and scarring. These studies highlight the need for further investigation into the outcomes of procedures performed by physician extenders.

Training of Physician Extenders

Even with medical management, emphasis on proper training of personnel is key and remains a legitimate concern. The training of physician extenders in dermatology differs greatly by location; while some physician extenders operate under meticulous guidance and thus can expand their skill set, other physician extenders shadow dermatologists for an arbitrary amount of time before being thrust into practice.10 It would be a disservice to both patients and nonphysician providers alike to conflate the latter regimen with the 4 years of medical school, 1 year of internship, and 3 years of rigorous specialized dermatologic training that physicians undergo.

This stark discrepancy between the training of physicians and physician extenders raises difficult questions about the patient’s right to make an informed decision regarding how they receive health care. Indeed, the casually regulated autonomous practice of some nonphysician providers has ignited public shock and ire.11

Reducing Health Care Expenditures

As legislatures deliberate over expanding scope of practice, policies should be based on evidence that prioritizes patient safety. In the appropriate setting, physician extenders can be instrumental to mitigating health care disparities; the use of physician extenders can diminish wait times for patients with routine visits for stable dermatologic disease.16 Moreover, reducing health care expenditures often is cited as a major benefit of increased utilization of physician extenders.14 It stands to reason that compensation of nonphysician providers is less expensive for a practice compared with physicians. Physician extenders participating in the management of stable chronic conditions or mild acute conditions may be cost-efficient in these circumstances; however, evidence suggests that physician extenders may incur greater costs than physicians with respect to the utilization of diagnostic tests or prescribing medications. For example, several studies have documented a substantial difference in the number of biopsies needed per malignant neoplasm by physicians compared to physician extenders.17-19 Particularly in patients younger than 65 years and in patients without history of skin cancer, physician extenders had to perform a greater number of biopsies to diagnose malignant neoplasms vs physicians.18 In addition to increased utilization of diagnostic tests, nonphysician providers more frequently prescribe medications of varying classes.20-22 Whether in outpatient offices, emergency departments, or hospital clinics, physician extenders more frequently prescribe antibiotics, which has concerning implications for antibiotic stewardship.20,21 In states with independent prescription authority, physician extenders are more than 20 times more likely to overprescribeopioids compared to physician extenders in states requiring physician supervision.23 These findings warrant additional investigation into how prescription patterns vary by provider type and how these differences impact patient outcomes.

Final Thoughts

Improving patient care is inherently a team endeavor, and the contributions of all members of the health care team are critical to success. Engaging physician extenders may help mitigate disparities in dermatologic care, with respect to surveillance of stable chronic conditions or the diagnosis of mild acute diseases. However, the exact scope of practice of physician extenders remains ambiguous, and their training regimens can vary drastically. Therefore, in the interest of patient safety, new patients or medically complex patients (ie, cutaneous lymphomas, nonstable autoimmune connective tissue disease) should be examined and managed by physicians. In either scenario, the patient should be informed of which providers are available and should be integrated into the decision-making process for their care. Through mutual respect, close collaboration, and candid assessments of patient complexity, different parties within the medical team can unite behind the mission to improve patient outcomes and champion equitable access to health care.

References
  1. Vaidya T, Zubritsky L, Alikhan A, et al. Socioeconomic and geographic barriers to dermatology care in urban and rural US populations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:406-408.
  2. Resneck J Jr, Kimball AB. The dermatology workforce shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:50-54.
  3. American Medical Association. Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the US. American Medical Association; 2002.
  4. Kimball AB, Resneck JS Jr. The US dermatology workforce: a specialty remains in shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;59:741-755.
  5. Tsang MW, Resneck JS Jr. Even patients with changing moles face long dermatology appointment wait-times: a study of simulated patient calls to dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;55:54-58.
  6. Suneja T, Smith ED, Chen GJ, et al. Waiting times to see a dermatologist are perceived as too long by dermatologists: implications for the dermatology workforce. Arch Dermatol. 2001;137:1303-1307.
  7. Zurfley F Jr, Mostow EN. Association between the use of a physician extender and dermatology appointment wait times in Ohio. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:1323-1324.
  8. Bean M. NP practice authority by state. Becker’s Hospital Review website. Published April 8, 2021. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/nursing/np-practice-authority-by-state.html
  9. States with full practice authority for nurse practitioners. Maryville University website. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://online.maryville.edu/nursing-degrees/np/resources/states-granting-np-full-practice-authority/
  10. Slade K, Lazenby M, Grant-Kels JM. Ethics of utilizing nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants in the dermatology setting. Clin Dermatol. 2012;30:516-521
  11. Hafner K, Palmer G. Skin cancers rise, along with questionable treatments. New York Times. November 20, 2017. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/health/dermatology-skin-cancer.html
  12. American Academy of Dermatology. Policy #P-61.500. the use of non-physician office personnel. Published February 22, 2002. Updated July 31, 2004. http://www.aad.org/Forms/Policies/Uploads/AR/COE%20-%20Ethics%20in%20Medical%20Practice%20Booklet.pdf
  13. 2016 ASDS Survey on Dermatologic Procedures. American Society for Dermatologic Surgery website. Published May 30, 2017. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://www.asds.net/skin-experts/news-room/press-releases/asds-survey-nearly-105-million-treatments-performed-in-2016
  14. Rossi AM, Wilson B, Hibler BP, et al. Nonphysician practice of cosmetic dermatology: a patient and physician perspective of outcomes and adverse events. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:588-597. 
  15. Anderson AM, Matsumoto M, Saul MI, et al. Accuracy of skin cancer diagnosis by physician assistants compared with dermatologists in a large health care system. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:569-573.
  16. O’Brien JC, Chong BF. Reducing outpatient dermatology clinic wait times in a safety net health system in Dallas, Texas. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:631-632.
  17. Aldredge LM, Young MS. Providing guidance for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who are candidates for biologic therapy: role of the nurse practitioner and physician assistant. J Dermatol Nurses Assoc. 2016;8:14-26.
  18. Roblin DW, Howard DH, Becker ER, et al. Use of midlevel practitioners to achieve labor cost savings in the primary care practice of an MCO. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:607-626.
  19. Nault A, Zhang C, Kim K, et al. Biopsy use in skin cancer diagnosis: comparing dermatology physicians and advanced practice professionals. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:899-902.
  20. Privalle A, Havighurst T, Kim K, et al. Number of skin biopsies needed per malignancy: comparing the use of skin biopsies among dermatologists and nondermatologist clinicians [published online August 10, 2019]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:110-116.
  21. Roumie CL, Halasa NB, Edwards KM, et al. Differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians, residents, and nonphysician clinicians. Am J Med. 2005;118:641-648.
  22. Sanchez GV, Hersh AL, Shapiro DJ, et al. Outpatient antibiotic prescribing among United States nurse practitioners and physician assistants [published online August 10, 2016]. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2016;3:ofw168.
  23. Lozada MJ, Raji MA, Goodwin JS, et al. Opioid prescribing by primary care providers: a cross-sectional analysis of nurse practitioner, physician assistant, and physician prescribing patterns [published online April 24, 2020]. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2584-2592.
References
  1. Vaidya T, Zubritsky L, Alikhan A, et al. Socioeconomic and geographic barriers to dermatology care in urban and rural US populations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:406-408.
  2. Resneck J Jr, Kimball AB. The dermatology workforce shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:50-54.
  3. American Medical Association. Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the US. American Medical Association; 2002.
  4. Kimball AB, Resneck JS Jr. The US dermatology workforce: a specialty remains in shortage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;59:741-755.
  5. Tsang MW, Resneck JS Jr. Even patients with changing moles face long dermatology appointment wait-times: a study of simulated patient calls to dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006;55:54-58.
  6. Suneja T, Smith ED, Chen GJ, et al. Waiting times to see a dermatologist are perceived as too long by dermatologists: implications for the dermatology workforce. Arch Dermatol. 2001;137:1303-1307.
  7. Zurfley F Jr, Mostow EN. Association between the use of a physician extender and dermatology appointment wait times in Ohio. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:1323-1324.
  8. Bean M. NP practice authority by state. Becker’s Hospital Review website. Published April 8, 2021. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/nursing/np-practice-authority-by-state.html
  9. States with full practice authority for nurse practitioners. Maryville University website. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://online.maryville.edu/nursing-degrees/np/resources/states-granting-np-full-practice-authority/
  10. Slade K, Lazenby M, Grant-Kels JM. Ethics of utilizing nurse practitioners and physician’s assistants in the dermatology setting. Clin Dermatol. 2012;30:516-521
  11. Hafner K, Palmer G. Skin cancers rise, along with questionable treatments. New York Times. November 20, 2017. Accessed December 4, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/health/dermatology-skin-cancer.html
  12. American Academy of Dermatology. Policy #P-61.500. the use of non-physician office personnel. Published February 22, 2002. Updated July 31, 2004. http://www.aad.org/Forms/Policies/Uploads/AR/COE%20-%20Ethics%20in%20Medical%20Practice%20Booklet.pdf
  13. 2016 ASDS Survey on Dermatologic Procedures. American Society for Dermatologic Surgery website. Published May 30, 2017. Accessed December 15, 2021. https://www.asds.net/skin-experts/news-room/press-releases/asds-survey-nearly-105-million-treatments-performed-in-2016
  14. Rossi AM, Wilson B, Hibler BP, et al. Nonphysician practice of cosmetic dermatology: a patient and physician perspective of outcomes and adverse events. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:588-597. 
  15. Anderson AM, Matsumoto M, Saul MI, et al. Accuracy of skin cancer diagnosis by physician assistants compared with dermatologists in a large health care system. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:569-573.
  16. O’Brien JC, Chong BF. Reducing outpatient dermatology clinic wait times in a safety net health system in Dallas, Texas. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:631-632.
  17. Aldredge LM, Young MS. Providing guidance for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who are candidates for biologic therapy: role of the nurse practitioner and physician assistant. J Dermatol Nurses Assoc. 2016;8:14-26.
  18. Roblin DW, Howard DH, Becker ER, et al. Use of midlevel practitioners to achieve labor cost savings in the primary care practice of an MCO. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:607-626.
  19. Nault A, Zhang C, Kim K, et al. Biopsy use in skin cancer diagnosis: comparing dermatology physicians and advanced practice professionals. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151:899-902.
  20. Privalle A, Havighurst T, Kim K, et al. Number of skin biopsies needed per malignancy: comparing the use of skin biopsies among dermatologists and nondermatologist clinicians [published online August 10, 2019]. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82:110-116.
  21. Roumie CL, Halasa NB, Edwards KM, et al. Differences in antibiotic prescribing among physicians, residents, and nonphysician clinicians. Am J Med. 2005;118:641-648.
  22. Sanchez GV, Hersh AL, Shapiro DJ, et al. Outpatient antibiotic prescribing among United States nurse practitioners and physician assistants [published online August 10, 2016]. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2016;3:ofw168.
  23. Lozada MJ, Raji MA, Goodwin JS, et al. Opioid prescribing by primary care providers: a cross-sectional analysis of nurse practitioner, physician assistant, and physician prescribing patterns [published online April 24, 2020]. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2584-2592.
Issue
Cutis - 108(6)
Issue
Cutis - 108(6)
Page Number
E17-E19
Page Number
E17-E19
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Navigating the Evolving Landscape of the Dermatologic Workforce
Display Headline
Navigating the Evolving Landscape of the Dermatologic Workforce
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Because dermatology residents are immersed in high-volume clinical practice, they offer a unique perspective on current patient needs and daily workflow challenges that can guide the development of health care policies and care models.
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

A Starter Guide to Immunofluorescence Testing in Dermatology

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/01/2021 - 14:38
Display Headline
A Starter Guide to Immunofluorescence Testing in Dermatology

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) is the go-to diagnostic test when evaluating vesiculobullous eruptions, connective tissue disease, and vasculitis. This specialized test allows visualization of autoantibodies and their reaction products in the epidermis and dermis (skin) and epithelium and subepithelium (mucosa). Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are additional tests that can help in the diagnosis of autoimmune blistering disease. In the blistering autoimmune diseases, the autoantibodies target components in skin and mucous membranes that are essential for cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion causing separation within or beneath the epidermis, depending on where the target components are located. This article is intended to serve as a helpful primer for immunofluorescence testing in dermatology, with an overview of the tests available as well as pragmatic tips for optimal biopsy sites and specimen transport.

Direct Immunofluorescence

Immunofluorescence techniques date back to 1941 when Albert Coons, an American physician, pathologist, and immunologist, fluorescently labelled antibodies to visualize pneumococcal antigens in infected tissues.1-3 In dermatology, similar methodology was used to visualize the deposition of immunoglobulins and complement in the skin of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in 1963.4 Basement membrane zone antibodies were first visualized via DIF in bullous pemphigoid in 1967.5 This elegant test utilizes specific antibodies labeled with fluorophores that are then incubated with the patient’s tissue, ultimately forming antibody-antigen conjugates that can be visualized with a fluorescent microscope. Antibodies usually include IgG, IgM, IgA, fibrinogen, and C3. Some institutions also evaluate for IgG4.

Transport medium is critical for proper evaluation of tissues using DIF. Inappropriate storage of tissue can degrade the antigen and confuse the interpretation of specimens. An acceptable medium for DIF includes Michel transport medium, which allows tissue to be stored for days while being transported at ambient temperature without loss of signal.6,7 Zeus medium also can be used and is more readily available. Alternatively, biopsy tissue can be snap frozen using liquid nitrogen. Specimens also may be stored on saline gauze but should be analyzed within 24 to 48 hours.8 Most importantly, do not place the specimen in formalin; even a brief soak in formalin can greatly alter results, especially when trying to diagnose pemphigus.9 Proper transport conditions are critical to prevent autolysis, mitigate putrefaction, and preserve morphology while maintaining antigenicity.10

 

Indirect Immunofluorescence

Indirect immunofluorescence can be helpful for detecting antibodies circulating in patient serum. Indirect immunofluorescence can be used to help diagnose pemphigoid, pemphigus, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita, bullous lupus erythematosus, and dermatitis herpetiformis. Serum testing also can be a helpful alternative when obtaining tissue is difficult, such as in children.

Indirect immunofluorescence is a 2-part technique that takes a bit longer to assay than DIF.11 The first step involves incubating prepared tissue substrates with patient serum. Unlabeled antibodies in the patient serum are allowed to bind to antigens in the substrate tissue for about 30 minutes. Doubling dilutions of patient serum can be performed to titer antibody levels. The second step uses fluorescein-labeled antihuman antibodies to recognize the antigen-antibody conjugates. Normal whole tissues (eg, monkey esophagus for pemphigus vulgaris, rat bladder for paraneoplastic pemphigus, salt-split normal human skin substrate for pemphigoid and epidermolysis bullosa) are the usual substrates for testing.11,12 Again, this test requires serum and should be collected in a red-top tube or serum-separator tube. Usually, a minimum of 0.5 mL is required for testing, but check with your preferred immunodermatology send-out laboratory before collecting.13

Indirect immunofluorescence usually involves an initial screening panel using 1 or 2 tissue substrates followed by individual antigen-specific assays that correspond to the clinical suspicion and IIF screening results.11 Salt-split skin is used to localize basement membrane zone autoantibodies to either the epidermal (roof) or dermal (floor) side. Although many dermatopathology laboratories offer DIF testing, IIF is more specialized and may be a send-out test at your institution.

Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assays

Another tool in the immunodermatology armamentarium is ELISA. Commercial ELISA systems are available for the detection of autoantibodies against bullous pemphigoid (BP) antigen 180, BP230, type VII collagen, desmoglein (Dsg) 1, Dsg3, and envoplakin.11 This test allows semiquantitative measurement of antibody levels and thus can be used to monitor response to treatment or identify relapse and treatment failure.11 For example, in BP, significantly increased baseline anti-BP180 IgG levels correlate with 1-year mortality rates (P=.001) and relapse rates (P=.041).14,15 Numerous additional studies support the observation that monitoring anti-BP180 as a potential marker of disease relapse can be helpful.16,17 In pemphigus, the presence or increase of autoantibodies at remission, either anti-Dsg3 or anti-Dsg1, may be a useful tool in predicting disease relapse.18 It is important for physicians to be aware of this to be able to offer guidance on prognosis.

 

 

Where Should I Biopsy?

Knowing where to biopsy can be confusing when beginning residency. But the short answer is, it depends. Let your clinical suspicion guide your specimen site. The Figure provides a quick reference for which location will give you the highest yield for a specific diagnosis.

Preferred sites for biopsy specimens for direct immunofluorescence (DIF) in autoimmune bullous disorders. BP indicates bullous pemphigoid; DH, dermatitis herpetiformis.

A few cardinal rules should guide which site is biopsied. Avoid obtaining specimens from the lower extremities as much as possible, as this site has been linked with false-negative results, especially in bullous pemphigoid.19,20 As a dependent area prone to stasis, this site gets a lot of abuse and inflammatory changes secondary to everyday insults that can theoretically alter DIF findings, especially fibrinogen deposition.

Although tissue sent for hematoxylin and eosin staining should be lesional, biopsy for DIF ideally should not contain a new or active blister, ulcer, erosion, or bulla. Immunoreactants are more likely to be degraded in these areas, and DIF may be falsely negative.21

It is worthwhile to briefly discuss the definitions of the terms perilesional and nonlesional. Perilesional skin most frequently refers to skin adjacent to a bulla or vesicle. This skin can be erythematous/inflamed or appear normal. When obtaining tissue for a diagnosis of blistering disease, the general recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from lesional nonbullous skin or perilesional uninvolved skin within 1 cm of the bulla.22-24 The only exception to this is dermatitis herpetiformis, which is best diagnosed on tissue obtained from normal-appearing perilesional skin within 1 cm of an active lesion.25 Additionally, if your patient has oral disease, the recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from nonlesional buccal mucosa, especially if there is desquamative gingivitis.26,27

The ideal biopsy size is 4 or 5 mm. If considering both DIF and histopathology, it is best to procure 2 separate specimens. One larger biopsy can be carefully bisected in 2 but often is subject to more handling artifacts, which can affect findings. In the case of 1 biopsy bisected into 2 specimens, the punch should be at least 6 mm. Shave biopsies also can be performed as long as they extend into the reticular dermis.23

 

 

For vasculitis, biopsies for DIF should be taken from lesions that are less than 24 hours old for highest yield, as the level of tissue immunoreactants tends to decline over time.28 This guideline does differ from hematoxylin and eosin specimens sent for evaluation of vasculitis, which ideally should be lesional tissue over 72 hours old. When evaluating for lupus (including subacute cutaneous lupus, discoid lupus, and systemic lupus), DIF is more likely to be positive in well-established, active lesions.

Which Test Should I Order?

The answer to this question depends, but the use of all 3 tests has a specificity close to 100% when evaluating for autoantibody-associated diseases.23 For autoimmune blistering disease, DIF is considered the diagnostic standard. The sensitivity of DIF for diagnosing BP is in the range of 82% to 90.5%, while specificity is 98%.29-31 Other autoimmune blistering diseases, such as pemphigus or dermatitis herpetiformis, have even higher sensitivities and specificities. Direct immunofluorescence often is used as a screening test, but false negatives do occur.32,33 Although rare, false positives also can occur, especially in cases of infection, and should be suspected when there is a lack of clinicopathologic correlation.34 If DIF is negative but clinical suspicion remains high, IIF should be ordered to directly evaluate a patient’s serum for autoantibodies.

In acute cutaneous lupus, subacute cutaneous lupus, and discoid lupus, DIF of active lesions may be helpful if histopathologic examination of a cutaneous lupus erythematosus lesion is nondiagnostic. However, histopathologic examination of formalin-fixed tissue remains the standard for these diagnoses. In vasculitis, while DIF is not used for diagnosis, it is useful to evaluate for IgA deposition. This is important in adults, as IgA deposition has been associated with a greater risk for developing end-stage renal disease.35

 

Final Thoughts

This is an overview of the tests available for diagnosing autoimmune blistering diseases. Residents should keep in mind that these tests are just one part of the puzzle when it comes to diagnosing these diseases. Results of DIF, IIF, and ELISA testing should be considered in conjunction with patient history and physical examination as well as histopathologic examination of lesional tissue when evaluating for dermatologic diseases with autoantibodies.

References
  1. Arthur G. Albert Coons: harnessing the power of the antibody. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4:181-182.
  2. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN. Immunological properties of an antibody containing a fluorescent group. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1941;47:200-202.
  3. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN, et al. The demonstration of pneumococcal antigen in tissues by the use of fluorescent antibody. J Immunol. 1942;45:159-170.
  4. Burnham TK, Neblett TR, Fine G. The application of the fluorescent antibody technic to the investigation of lupus erythematosus and various dermatoses. J Invest Dermatol. 1963;41:451-456.
  5. Jordon RE, Beutner EH, Witebsky E, et al. Basement zone antibodies in bullous pemphigoid. JAMA. 1967;200:751-756.
  6. Vaughan Jones SA, Salas J, McGrath JA, et al. A retrospective analysis of tissue-fixed immunoreactants from skin biopsies maintained in Michel’s medium. Dermatology. 1994;189(suppl 1):131-132.
  7. Kim RH, Brinster NK. Practical direct immunofluorescence. Am J Dermatopathol. 2020;42:75-85.
  8. Vodegel RM, de Jong MC, Meijer HJ, et al. Enhanced diagnostic immunofluorescence using biopsies transported in saline. BMC Dermatol. 2004;4:10.
  9. Arbesman J, Grover R, Helm TN, et al. Can direct immunofluorescence testing still be accurate if performed on biopsy specimens after brief inadvertent immersion in formalin? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:106-111.
  10. Im K, Mareninov S, Diaz MFP, et al. An introduction to performing immunofluorescence staining. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1897:299-311.
  11. Saschenbrecker S, Karl I, Komorowski L, et al. Serological diagnosis of autoimmune bullous skin diseases. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1974.
  12. Baum S, Sakka N, Artsi O, et al. Diagnosis and classification of autoimmune blistering diseases. Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13:482-489.
  13. Immunobullous disease panel, epithelial. ARUP Laboratories website. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://ltd.aruplab.com/Tests/Pub/3001409
  14. Monshi B, Gulz L, Piringer B, et al. Anti-BP180 autoantibody levels at diagnosis correlate with 1-year mortality rates in patients with bullous pemphigoid. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1583-1589.
  15. Koga H, Teye K, Ishii N, et al. High index values of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for BP180 at baseline predict relapse in patients with bullous pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:139.
  16. Fichel F, Barbe C, Joly P, et al. Clinical and immunologic factors associated with bullous pemphigoid relapse during the first year of treatment: a multicenter, prospective study. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:25-33.
  17. Cai SC, Lim YL, Li W, et al. Anti-BP180 NC16A IgG titres as an indicator of disease activity and outcome in Asian patients with bullous pemphigoid. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2015;44:119-126.
  18. Genovese G, Maronese CA, Casazza G, et al. Clinical and serological predictors of relapse in pemphigus: a study of 143 patients [published online July 20, 2021]. Clin Exp Dermatol. doi:10.1111/ced.14854
  19. Weigand DA. Effect of anatomic region on immunofluorescence diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1985;12(2, pt 1):274-278.
  20. Weigand DA, Clements MK. Direct immunofluorescence in bullous pemphigoid: effects of extent and location of lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1989;20:437-440.
  21. Mutasim DF, Adams BB. Immunofluorescence in dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;45:803-822; quiz 822-824.
  22. Sladden C, Kirchhof MG, Crawford RI. Biopsy location for direct immunofluorescence in patients with suspected bullous pemphigoid impacts probability of a positive test result. J Cutan Med Surg. 2014;18:392-396.
  23. Elston DM, Stratman EJ, Miller SJ. Skin biopsy: biopsy issues in specific diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:1-16; quiz 17-18.
  24. Seishima M, Izumi T, Kitajima Y. Antibody to bullous pemphigoid antigen 1 binds to the antigen at perilesional but not uninvolved skin, in localized bullous pemphigoid. Eur J Dermatol. 1999;9:39-42.
  25. Zone JJ, Meyer LJ, Petersen MJ. Deposition of granular IgA relative to clinical lesions in dermatitis herpetiformis. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:912-918.
  26. Kamaguchi M, Iwata H, Ujiie I, et al. Direct immunofluorescence using non-lesional buccal mucosa in mucous membrane pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:20.
  27. Carey B, Joshi S, Abdelghani A, et al. The optimal oral biopsy site for diagnosis of mucous membrane pemphigoid and pemphigus vulgaris. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:747-753.
  28. Kulthanan K, Pinkaew S, Jiamton S, et al. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis: the yield of direct immunofluorescence study. J Med Assoc Thai. 2004;87:531-535.
  29. Chaidemenos GC, Maltezos E, Chrysomallis F, et al. Value of routine diagnostic criteria of bullous pemphigoid. Int J Dermatol. 1998;37:206-210.
  30. Mysorekar VV, Sumathy TK, Shyam Prasad AL. Role of direct immunofluorescence in dermatological disorders. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:172-180.
  31. Fudge JG, Crawford RI. Bullous pemphigoid: a 10-year study of discordant results on direct immunofluorescence. J Cutan Med Surg. 2018;22:472-475.
  32. Sárdy M, Kostaki D, Varga R, et al. Comparative study of direct and indirect immunofluorescence and of bullous pemphigoid 180 and 230 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:748-753.
  33. Buch AC, Kumar H, Panicker N, et al. A cross-sectional study of direct immunofluorescence in the diagnosis of immunobullous dermatoses. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59:364-368.
  34. Miller DD, Bhawan J. Bullous tinea pedis with direct immunofluorescence positivity: when is a positive result not autoimmune bullous disease? Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:587-594.
  35. Cao R, Lau S, Tan V, et al. Adult Henoch-Schönlein purpura: clinical and histopathological predictors of systemic disease and profound renal disease. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2017;83:577-582.
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 (Margaret.Cocks@hsc.utah.edu).

Issue
Cutis - 108(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E23-E26
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 (Margaret.Cocks@hsc.utah.edu).

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 (Margaret.Cocks@hsc.utah.edu).

Article PDF
Article PDF

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) is the go-to diagnostic test when evaluating vesiculobullous eruptions, connective tissue disease, and vasculitis. This specialized test allows visualization of autoantibodies and their reaction products in the epidermis and dermis (skin) and epithelium and subepithelium (mucosa). Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are additional tests that can help in the diagnosis of autoimmune blistering disease. In the blistering autoimmune diseases, the autoantibodies target components in skin and mucous membranes that are essential for cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion causing separation within or beneath the epidermis, depending on where the target components are located. This article is intended to serve as a helpful primer for immunofluorescence testing in dermatology, with an overview of the tests available as well as pragmatic tips for optimal biopsy sites and specimen transport.

Direct Immunofluorescence

Immunofluorescence techniques date back to 1941 when Albert Coons, an American physician, pathologist, and immunologist, fluorescently labelled antibodies to visualize pneumococcal antigens in infected tissues.1-3 In dermatology, similar methodology was used to visualize the deposition of immunoglobulins and complement in the skin of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in 1963.4 Basement membrane zone antibodies were first visualized via DIF in bullous pemphigoid in 1967.5 This elegant test utilizes specific antibodies labeled with fluorophores that are then incubated with the patient’s tissue, ultimately forming antibody-antigen conjugates that can be visualized with a fluorescent microscope. Antibodies usually include IgG, IgM, IgA, fibrinogen, and C3. Some institutions also evaluate for IgG4.

Transport medium is critical for proper evaluation of tissues using DIF. Inappropriate storage of tissue can degrade the antigen and confuse the interpretation of specimens. An acceptable medium for DIF includes Michel transport medium, which allows tissue to be stored for days while being transported at ambient temperature without loss of signal.6,7 Zeus medium also can be used and is more readily available. Alternatively, biopsy tissue can be snap frozen using liquid nitrogen. Specimens also may be stored on saline gauze but should be analyzed within 24 to 48 hours.8 Most importantly, do not place the specimen in formalin; even a brief soak in formalin can greatly alter results, especially when trying to diagnose pemphigus.9 Proper transport conditions are critical to prevent autolysis, mitigate putrefaction, and preserve morphology while maintaining antigenicity.10

 

Indirect Immunofluorescence

Indirect immunofluorescence can be helpful for detecting antibodies circulating in patient serum. Indirect immunofluorescence can be used to help diagnose pemphigoid, pemphigus, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita, bullous lupus erythematosus, and dermatitis herpetiformis. Serum testing also can be a helpful alternative when obtaining tissue is difficult, such as in children.

Indirect immunofluorescence is a 2-part technique that takes a bit longer to assay than DIF.11 The first step involves incubating prepared tissue substrates with patient serum. Unlabeled antibodies in the patient serum are allowed to bind to antigens in the substrate tissue for about 30 minutes. Doubling dilutions of patient serum can be performed to titer antibody levels. The second step uses fluorescein-labeled antihuman antibodies to recognize the antigen-antibody conjugates. Normal whole tissues (eg, monkey esophagus for pemphigus vulgaris, rat bladder for paraneoplastic pemphigus, salt-split normal human skin substrate for pemphigoid and epidermolysis bullosa) are the usual substrates for testing.11,12 Again, this test requires serum and should be collected in a red-top tube or serum-separator tube. Usually, a minimum of 0.5 mL is required for testing, but check with your preferred immunodermatology send-out laboratory before collecting.13

Indirect immunofluorescence usually involves an initial screening panel using 1 or 2 tissue substrates followed by individual antigen-specific assays that correspond to the clinical suspicion and IIF screening results.11 Salt-split skin is used to localize basement membrane zone autoantibodies to either the epidermal (roof) or dermal (floor) side. Although many dermatopathology laboratories offer DIF testing, IIF is more specialized and may be a send-out test at your institution.

Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assays

Another tool in the immunodermatology armamentarium is ELISA. Commercial ELISA systems are available for the detection of autoantibodies against bullous pemphigoid (BP) antigen 180, BP230, type VII collagen, desmoglein (Dsg) 1, Dsg3, and envoplakin.11 This test allows semiquantitative measurement of antibody levels and thus can be used to monitor response to treatment or identify relapse and treatment failure.11 For example, in BP, significantly increased baseline anti-BP180 IgG levels correlate with 1-year mortality rates (P=.001) and relapse rates (P=.041).14,15 Numerous additional studies support the observation that monitoring anti-BP180 as a potential marker of disease relapse can be helpful.16,17 In pemphigus, the presence or increase of autoantibodies at remission, either anti-Dsg3 or anti-Dsg1, may be a useful tool in predicting disease relapse.18 It is important for physicians to be aware of this to be able to offer guidance on prognosis.

 

 

Where Should I Biopsy?

Knowing where to biopsy can be confusing when beginning residency. But the short answer is, it depends. Let your clinical suspicion guide your specimen site. The Figure provides a quick reference for which location will give you the highest yield for a specific diagnosis.

Preferred sites for biopsy specimens for direct immunofluorescence (DIF) in autoimmune bullous disorders. BP indicates bullous pemphigoid; DH, dermatitis herpetiformis.

A few cardinal rules should guide which site is biopsied. Avoid obtaining specimens from the lower extremities as much as possible, as this site has been linked with false-negative results, especially in bullous pemphigoid.19,20 As a dependent area prone to stasis, this site gets a lot of abuse and inflammatory changes secondary to everyday insults that can theoretically alter DIF findings, especially fibrinogen deposition.

Although tissue sent for hematoxylin and eosin staining should be lesional, biopsy for DIF ideally should not contain a new or active blister, ulcer, erosion, or bulla. Immunoreactants are more likely to be degraded in these areas, and DIF may be falsely negative.21

It is worthwhile to briefly discuss the definitions of the terms perilesional and nonlesional. Perilesional skin most frequently refers to skin adjacent to a bulla or vesicle. This skin can be erythematous/inflamed or appear normal. When obtaining tissue for a diagnosis of blistering disease, the general recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from lesional nonbullous skin or perilesional uninvolved skin within 1 cm of the bulla.22-24 The only exception to this is dermatitis herpetiformis, which is best diagnosed on tissue obtained from normal-appearing perilesional skin within 1 cm of an active lesion.25 Additionally, if your patient has oral disease, the recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from nonlesional buccal mucosa, especially if there is desquamative gingivitis.26,27

The ideal biopsy size is 4 or 5 mm. If considering both DIF and histopathology, it is best to procure 2 separate specimens. One larger biopsy can be carefully bisected in 2 but often is subject to more handling artifacts, which can affect findings. In the case of 1 biopsy bisected into 2 specimens, the punch should be at least 6 mm. Shave biopsies also can be performed as long as they extend into the reticular dermis.23

 

 

For vasculitis, biopsies for DIF should be taken from lesions that are less than 24 hours old for highest yield, as the level of tissue immunoreactants tends to decline over time.28 This guideline does differ from hematoxylin and eosin specimens sent for evaluation of vasculitis, which ideally should be lesional tissue over 72 hours old. When evaluating for lupus (including subacute cutaneous lupus, discoid lupus, and systemic lupus), DIF is more likely to be positive in well-established, active lesions.

Which Test Should I Order?

The answer to this question depends, but the use of all 3 tests has a specificity close to 100% when evaluating for autoantibody-associated diseases.23 For autoimmune blistering disease, DIF is considered the diagnostic standard. The sensitivity of DIF for diagnosing BP is in the range of 82% to 90.5%, while specificity is 98%.29-31 Other autoimmune blistering diseases, such as pemphigus or dermatitis herpetiformis, have even higher sensitivities and specificities. Direct immunofluorescence often is used as a screening test, but false negatives do occur.32,33 Although rare, false positives also can occur, especially in cases of infection, and should be suspected when there is a lack of clinicopathologic correlation.34 If DIF is negative but clinical suspicion remains high, IIF should be ordered to directly evaluate a patient’s serum for autoantibodies.

In acute cutaneous lupus, subacute cutaneous lupus, and discoid lupus, DIF of active lesions may be helpful if histopathologic examination of a cutaneous lupus erythematosus lesion is nondiagnostic. However, histopathologic examination of formalin-fixed tissue remains the standard for these diagnoses. In vasculitis, while DIF is not used for diagnosis, it is useful to evaluate for IgA deposition. This is important in adults, as IgA deposition has been associated with a greater risk for developing end-stage renal disease.35

 

Final Thoughts

This is an overview of the tests available for diagnosing autoimmune blistering diseases. Residents should keep in mind that these tests are just one part of the puzzle when it comes to diagnosing these diseases. Results of DIF, IIF, and ELISA testing should be considered in conjunction with patient history and physical examination as well as histopathologic examination of lesional tissue when evaluating for dermatologic diseases with autoantibodies.

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) is the go-to diagnostic test when evaluating vesiculobullous eruptions, connective tissue disease, and vasculitis. This specialized test allows visualization of autoantibodies and their reaction products in the epidermis and dermis (skin) and epithelium and subepithelium (mucosa). Indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are additional tests that can help in the diagnosis of autoimmune blistering disease. In the blistering autoimmune diseases, the autoantibodies target components in skin and mucous membranes that are essential for cell-cell and cell-matrix adhesion causing separation within or beneath the epidermis, depending on where the target components are located. This article is intended to serve as a helpful primer for immunofluorescence testing in dermatology, with an overview of the tests available as well as pragmatic tips for optimal biopsy sites and specimen transport.

Direct Immunofluorescence

Immunofluorescence techniques date back to 1941 when Albert Coons, an American physician, pathologist, and immunologist, fluorescently labelled antibodies to visualize pneumococcal antigens in infected tissues.1-3 In dermatology, similar methodology was used to visualize the deposition of immunoglobulins and complement in the skin of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus in 1963.4 Basement membrane zone antibodies were first visualized via DIF in bullous pemphigoid in 1967.5 This elegant test utilizes specific antibodies labeled with fluorophores that are then incubated with the patient’s tissue, ultimately forming antibody-antigen conjugates that can be visualized with a fluorescent microscope. Antibodies usually include IgG, IgM, IgA, fibrinogen, and C3. Some institutions also evaluate for IgG4.

Transport medium is critical for proper evaluation of tissues using DIF. Inappropriate storage of tissue can degrade the antigen and confuse the interpretation of specimens. An acceptable medium for DIF includes Michel transport medium, which allows tissue to be stored for days while being transported at ambient temperature without loss of signal.6,7 Zeus medium also can be used and is more readily available. Alternatively, biopsy tissue can be snap frozen using liquid nitrogen. Specimens also may be stored on saline gauze but should be analyzed within 24 to 48 hours.8 Most importantly, do not place the specimen in formalin; even a brief soak in formalin can greatly alter results, especially when trying to diagnose pemphigus.9 Proper transport conditions are critical to prevent autolysis, mitigate putrefaction, and preserve morphology while maintaining antigenicity.10

 

Indirect Immunofluorescence

Indirect immunofluorescence can be helpful for detecting antibodies circulating in patient serum. Indirect immunofluorescence can be used to help diagnose pemphigoid, pemphigus, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita, bullous lupus erythematosus, and dermatitis herpetiformis. Serum testing also can be a helpful alternative when obtaining tissue is difficult, such as in children.

Indirect immunofluorescence is a 2-part technique that takes a bit longer to assay than DIF.11 The first step involves incubating prepared tissue substrates with patient serum. Unlabeled antibodies in the patient serum are allowed to bind to antigens in the substrate tissue for about 30 minutes. Doubling dilutions of patient serum can be performed to titer antibody levels. The second step uses fluorescein-labeled antihuman antibodies to recognize the antigen-antibody conjugates. Normal whole tissues (eg, monkey esophagus for pemphigus vulgaris, rat bladder for paraneoplastic pemphigus, salt-split normal human skin substrate for pemphigoid and epidermolysis bullosa) are the usual substrates for testing.11,12 Again, this test requires serum and should be collected in a red-top tube or serum-separator tube. Usually, a minimum of 0.5 mL is required for testing, but check with your preferred immunodermatology send-out laboratory before collecting.13

Indirect immunofluorescence usually involves an initial screening panel using 1 or 2 tissue substrates followed by individual antigen-specific assays that correspond to the clinical suspicion and IIF screening results.11 Salt-split skin is used to localize basement membrane zone autoantibodies to either the epidermal (roof) or dermal (floor) side. Although many dermatopathology laboratories offer DIF testing, IIF is more specialized and may be a send-out test at your institution.

Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assays

Another tool in the immunodermatology armamentarium is ELISA. Commercial ELISA systems are available for the detection of autoantibodies against bullous pemphigoid (BP) antigen 180, BP230, type VII collagen, desmoglein (Dsg) 1, Dsg3, and envoplakin.11 This test allows semiquantitative measurement of antibody levels and thus can be used to monitor response to treatment or identify relapse and treatment failure.11 For example, in BP, significantly increased baseline anti-BP180 IgG levels correlate with 1-year mortality rates (P=.001) and relapse rates (P=.041).14,15 Numerous additional studies support the observation that monitoring anti-BP180 as a potential marker of disease relapse can be helpful.16,17 In pemphigus, the presence or increase of autoantibodies at remission, either anti-Dsg3 or anti-Dsg1, may be a useful tool in predicting disease relapse.18 It is important for physicians to be aware of this to be able to offer guidance on prognosis.

 

 

Where Should I Biopsy?

Knowing where to biopsy can be confusing when beginning residency. But the short answer is, it depends. Let your clinical suspicion guide your specimen site. The Figure provides a quick reference for which location will give you the highest yield for a specific diagnosis.

Preferred sites for biopsy specimens for direct immunofluorescence (DIF) in autoimmune bullous disorders. BP indicates bullous pemphigoid; DH, dermatitis herpetiformis.

A few cardinal rules should guide which site is biopsied. Avoid obtaining specimens from the lower extremities as much as possible, as this site has been linked with false-negative results, especially in bullous pemphigoid.19,20 As a dependent area prone to stasis, this site gets a lot of abuse and inflammatory changes secondary to everyday insults that can theoretically alter DIF findings, especially fibrinogen deposition.

Although tissue sent for hematoxylin and eosin staining should be lesional, biopsy for DIF ideally should not contain a new or active blister, ulcer, erosion, or bulla. Immunoreactants are more likely to be degraded in these areas, and DIF may be falsely negative.21

It is worthwhile to briefly discuss the definitions of the terms perilesional and nonlesional. Perilesional skin most frequently refers to skin adjacent to a bulla or vesicle. This skin can be erythematous/inflamed or appear normal. When obtaining tissue for a diagnosis of blistering disease, the general recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from lesional nonbullous skin or perilesional uninvolved skin within 1 cm of the bulla.22-24 The only exception to this is dermatitis herpetiformis, which is best diagnosed on tissue obtained from normal-appearing perilesional skin within 1 cm of an active lesion.25 Additionally, if your patient has oral disease, the recommendation is to obtain the biopsy from nonlesional buccal mucosa, especially if there is desquamative gingivitis.26,27

The ideal biopsy size is 4 or 5 mm. If considering both DIF and histopathology, it is best to procure 2 separate specimens. One larger biopsy can be carefully bisected in 2 but often is subject to more handling artifacts, which can affect findings. In the case of 1 biopsy bisected into 2 specimens, the punch should be at least 6 mm. Shave biopsies also can be performed as long as they extend into the reticular dermis.23

 

 

For vasculitis, biopsies for DIF should be taken from lesions that are less than 24 hours old for highest yield, as the level of tissue immunoreactants tends to decline over time.28 This guideline does differ from hematoxylin and eosin specimens sent for evaluation of vasculitis, which ideally should be lesional tissue over 72 hours old. When evaluating for lupus (including subacute cutaneous lupus, discoid lupus, and systemic lupus), DIF is more likely to be positive in well-established, active lesions.

Which Test Should I Order?

The answer to this question depends, but the use of all 3 tests has a specificity close to 100% when evaluating for autoantibody-associated diseases.23 For autoimmune blistering disease, DIF is considered the diagnostic standard. The sensitivity of DIF for diagnosing BP is in the range of 82% to 90.5%, while specificity is 98%.29-31 Other autoimmune blistering diseases, such as pemphigus or dermatitis herpetiformis, have even higher sensitivities and specificities. Direct immunofluorescence often is used as a screening test, but false negatives do occur.32,33 Although rare, false positives also can occur, especially in cases of infection, and should be suspected when there is a lack of clinicopathologic correlation.34 If DIF is negative but clinical suspicion remains high, IIF should be ordered to directly evaluate a patient’s serum for autoantibodies.

In acute cutaneous lupus, subacute cutaneous lupus, and discoid lupus, DIF of active lesions may be helpful if histopathologic examination of a cutaneous lupus erythematosus lesion is nondiagnostic. However, histopathologic examination of formalin-fixed tissue remains the standard for these diagnoses. In vasculitis, while DIF is not used for diagnosis, it is useful to evaluate for IgA deposition. This is important in adults, as IgA deposition has been associated with a greater risk for developing end-stage renal disease.35

 

Final Thoughts

This is an overview of the tests available for diagnosing autoimmune blistering diseases. Residents should keep in mind that these tests are just one part of the puzzle when it comes to diagnosing these diseases. Results of DIF, IIF, and ELISA testing should be considered in conjunction with patient history and physical examination as well as histopathologic examination of lesional tissue when evaluating for dermatologic diseases with autoantibodies.

References
  1. Arthur G. Albert Coons: harnessing the power of the antibody. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4:181-182.
  2. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN. Immunological properties of an antibody containing a fluorescent group. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1941;47:200-202.
  3. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN, et al. The demonstration of pneumococcal antigen in tissues by the use of fluorescent antibody. J Immunol. 1942;45:159-170.
  4. Burnham TK, Neblett TR, Fine G. The application of the fluorescent antibody technic to the investigation of lupus erythematosus and various dermatoses. J Invest Dermatol. 1963;41:451-456.
  5. Jordon RE, Beutner EH, Witebsky E, et al. Basement zone antibodies in bullous pemphigoid. JAMA. 1967;200:751-756.
  6. Vaughan Jones SA, Salas J, McGrath JA, et al. A retrospective analysis of tissue-fixed immunoreactants from skin biopsies maintained in Michel’s medium. Dermatology. 1994;189(suppl 1):131-132.
  7. Kim RH, Brinster NK. Practical direct immunofluorescence. Am J Dermatopathol. 2020;42:75-85.
  8. Vodegel RM, de Jong MC, Meijer HJ, et al. Enhanced diagnostic immunofluorescence using biopsies transported in saline. BMC Dermatol. 2004;4:10.
  9. Arbesman J, Grover R, Helm TN, et al. Can direct immunofluorescence testing still be accurate if performed on biopsy specimens after brief inadvertent immersion in formalin? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:106-111.
  10. Im K, Mareninov S, Diaz MFP, et al. An introduction to performing immunofluorescence staining. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1897:299-311.
  11. Saschenbrecker S, Karl I, Komorowski L, et al. Serological diagnosis of autoimmune bullous skin diseases. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1974.
  12. Baum S, Sakka N, Artsi O, et al. Diagnosis and classification of autoimmune blistering diseases. Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13:482-489.
  13. Immunobullous disease panel, epithelial. ARUP Laboratories website. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://ltd.aruplab.com/Tests/Pub/3001409
  14. Monshi B, Gulz L, Piringer B, et al. Anti-BP180 autoantibody levels at diagnosis correlate with 1-year mortality rates in patients with bullous pemphigoid. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1583-1589.
  15. Koga H, Teye K, Ishii N, et al. High index values of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for BP180 at baseline predict relapse in patients with bullous pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:139.
  16. Fichel F, Barbe C, Joly P, et al. Clinical and immunologic factors associated with bullous pemphigoid relapse during the first year of treatment: a multicenter, prospective study. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:25-33.
  17. Cai SC, Lim YL, Li W, et al. Anti-BP180 NC16A IgG titres as an indicator of disease activity and outcome in Asian patients with bullous pemphigoid. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2015;44:119-126.
  18. Genovese G, Maronese CA, Casazza G, et al. Clinical and serological predictors of relapse in pemphigus: a study of 143 patients [published online July 20, 2021]. Clin Exp Dermatol. doi:10.1111/ced.14854
  19. Weigand DA. Effect of anatomic region on immunofluorescence diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1985;12(2, pt 1):274-278.
  20. Weigand DA, Clements MK. Direct immunofluorescence in bullous pemphigoid: effects of extent and location of lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1989;20:437-440.
  21. Mutasim DF, Adams BB. Immunofluorescence in dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;45:803-822; quiz 822-824.
  22. Sladden C, Kirchhof MG, Crawford RI. Biopsy location for direct immunofluorescence in patients with suspected bullous pemphigoid impacts probability of a positive test result. J Cutan Med Surg. 2014;18:392-396.
  23. Elston DM, Stratman EJ, Miller SJ. Skin biopsy: biopsy issues in specific diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:1-16; quiz 17-18.
  24. Seishima M, Izumi T, Kitajima Y. Antibody to bullous pemphigoid antigen 1 binds to the antigen at perilesional but not uninvolved skin, in localized bullous pemphigoid. Eur J Dermatol. 1999;9:39-42.
  25. Zone JJ, Meyer LJ, Petersen MJ. Deposition of granular IgA relative to clinical lesions in dermatitis herpetiformis. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:912-918.
  26. Kamaguchi M, Iwata H, Ujiie I, et al. Direct immunofluorescence using non-lesional buccal mucosa in mucous membrane pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:20.
  27. Carey B, Joshi S, Abdelghani A, et al. The optimal oral biopsy site for diagnosis of mucous membrane pemphigoid and pemphigus vulgaris. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:747-753.
  28. Kulthanan K, Pinkaew S, Jiamton S, et al. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis: the yield of direct immunofluorescence study. J Med Assoc Thai. 2004;87:531-535.
  29. Chaidemenos GC, Maltezos E, Chrysomallis F, et al. Value of routine diagnostic criteria of bullous pemphigoid. Int J Dermatol. 1998;37:206-210.
  30. Mysorekar VV, Sumathy TK, Shyam Prasad AL. Role of direct immunofluorescence in dermatological disorders. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:172-180.
  31. Fudge JG, Crawford RI. Bullous pemphigoid: a 10-year study of discordant results on direct immunofluorescence. J Cutan Med Surg. 2018;22:472-475.
  32. Sárdy M, Kostaki D, Varga R, et al. Comparative study of direct and indirect immunofluorescence and of bullous pemphigoid 180 and 230 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:748-753.
  33. Buch AC, Kumar H, Panicker N, et al. A cross-sectional study of direct immunofluorescence in the diagnosis of immunobullous dermatoses. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59:364-368.
  34. Miller DD, Bhawan J. Bullous tinea pedis with direct immunofluorescence positivity: when is a positive result not autoimmune bullous disease? Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:587-594.
  35. Cao R, Lau S, Tan V, et al. Adult Henoch-Schönlein purpura: clinical and histopathological predictors of systemic disease and profound renal disease. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2017;83:577-582.
References
  1. Arthur G. Albert Coons: harnessing the power of the antibody. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4:181-182.
  2. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN. Immunological properties of an antibody containing a fluorescent group. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1941;47:200-202.
  3. Coons AH, Creech HJ, Jones RN, et al. The demonstration of pneumococcal antigen in tissues by the use of fluorescent antibody. J Immunol. 1942;45:159-170.
  4. Burnham TK, Neblett TR, Fine G. The application of the fluorescent antibody technic to the investigation of lupus erythematosus and various dermatoses. J Invest Dermatol. 1963;41:451-456.
  5. Jordon RE, Beutner EH, Witebsky E, et al. Basement zone antibodies in bullous pemphigoid. JAMA. 1967;200:751-756.
  6. Vaughan Jones SA, Salas J, McGrath JA, et al. A retrospective analysis of tissue-fixed immunoreactants from skin biopsies maintained in Michel’s medium. Dermatology. 1994;189(suppl 1):131-132.
  7. Kim RH, Brinster NK. Practical direct immunofluorescence. Am J Dermatopathol. 2020;42:75-85.
  8. Vodegel RM, de Jong MC, Meijer HJ, et al. Enhanced diagnostic immunofluorescence using biopsies transported in saline. BMC Dermatol. 2004;4:10.
  9. Arbesman J, Grover R, Helm TN, et al. Can direct immunofluorescence testing still be accurate if performed on biopsy specimens after brief inadvertent immersion in formalin? J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011;65:106-111.
  10. Im K, Mareninov S, Diaz MFP, et al. An introduction to performing immunofluorescence staining. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1897:299-311.
  11. Saschenbrecker S, Karl I, Komorowski L, et al. Serological diagnosis of autoimmune bullous skin diseases. Front Immunol. 2019;10:1974.
  12. Baum S, Sakka N, Artsi O, et al. Diagnosis and classification of autoimmune blistering diseases. Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13:482-489.
  13. Immunobullous disease panel, epithelial. ARUP Laboratories website. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://ltd.aruplab.com/Tests/Pub/3001409
  14. Monshi B, Gulz L, Piringer B, et al. Anti-BP180 autoantibody levels at diagnosis correlate with 1-year mortality rates in patients with bullous pemphigoid. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:1583-1589.
  15. Koga H, Teye K, Ishii N, et al. High index values of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for BP180 at baseline predict relapse in patients with bullous pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:139.
  16. Fichel F, Barbe C, Joly P, et al. Clinical and immunologic factors associated with bullous pemphigoid relapse during the first year of treatment: a multicenter, prospective study. JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150:25-33.
  17. Cai SC, Lim YL, Li W, et al. Anti-BP180 NC16A IgG titres as an indicator of disease activity and outcome in Asian patients with bullous pemphigoid. Ann Acad Med Singap. 2015;44:119-126.
  18. Genovese G, Maronese CA, Casazza G, et al. Clinical and serological predictors of relapse in pemphigus: a study of 143 patients [published online July 20, 2021]. Clin Exp Dermatol. doi:10.1111/ced.14854
  19. Weigand DA. Effect of anatomic region on immunofluorescence diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1985;12(2, pt 1):274-278.
  20. Weigand DA, Clements MK. Direct immunofluorescence in bullous pemphigoid: effects of extent and location of lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1989;20:437-440.
  21. Mutasim DF, Adams BB. Immunofluorescence in dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;45:803-822; quiz 822-824.
  22. Sladden C, Kirchhof MG, Crawford RI. Biopsy location for direct immunofluorescence in patients with suspected bullous pemphigoid impacts probability of a positive test result. J Cutan Med Surg. 2014;18:392-396.
  23. Elston DM, Stratman EJ, Miller SJ. Skin biopsy: biopsy issues in specific diseases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74:1-16; quiz 17-18.
  24. Seishima M, Izumi T, Kitajima Y. Antibody to bullous pemphigoid antigen 1 binds to the antigen at perilesional but not uninvolved skin, in localized bullous pemphigoid. Eur J Dermatol. 1999;9:39-42.
  25. Zone JJ, Meyer LJ, Petersen MJ. Deposition of granular IgA relative to clinical lesions in dermatitis herpetiformis. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132:912-918.
  26. Kamaguchi M, Iwata H, Ujiie I, et al. Direct immunofluorescence using non-lesional buccal mucosa in mucous membrane pemphigoid. Front Med (Lausanne). 2018;5:20.
  27. Carey B, Joshi S, Abdelghani A, et al. The optimal oral biopsy site for diagnosis of mucous membrane pemphigoid and pemphigus vulgaris. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:747-753.
  28. Kulthanan K, Pinkaew S, Jiamton S, et al. Cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis: the yield of direct immunofluorescence study. J Med Assoc Thai. 2004;87:531-535.
  29. Chaidemenos GC, Maltezos E, Chrysomallis F, et al. Value of routine diagnostic criteria of bullous pemphigoid. Int J Dermatol. 1998;37:206-210.
  30. Mysorekar VV, Sumathy TK, Shyam Prasad AL. Role of direct immunofluorescence in dermatological disorders. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:172-180.
  31. Fudge JG, Crawford RI. Bullous pemphigoid: a 10-year study of discordant results on direct immunofluorescence. J Cutan Med Surg. 2018;22:472-475.
  32. Sárdy M, Kostaki D, Varga R, et al. Comparative study of direct and indirect immunofluorescence and of bullous pemphigoid 180 and 230 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;69:748-753.
  33. Buch AC, Kumar H, Panicker N, et al. A cross-sectional study of direct immunofluorescence in the diagnosis of immunobullous dermatoses. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59:364-368.
  34. Miller DD, Bhawan J. Bullous tinea pedis with direct immunofluorescence positivity: when is a positive result not autoimmune bullous disease? Am J Dermatopathol. 2013;35:587-594.
  35. Cao R, Lau S, Tan V, et al. Adult Henoch-Schönlein purpura: clinical and histopathological predictors of systemic disease and profound renal disease. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2017;83:577-582.
Issue
Cutis - 108(5)
Issue
Cutis - 108(5)
Page Number
E23-E26
Page Number
E23-E26
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
A Starter Guide to Immunofluorescence Testing in Dermatology
Display Headline
A Starter Guide to Immunofluorescence Testing in Dermatology
Sections
Inside the Article

Resident Pearl

  • Direct immunofluorescence, indirect immunofluorescence, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay are important tests for residents to have in their diagnostic tool box, especially when evaluating patients with blistering diseases.
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

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 (lucinda.kohn@cuanschutz.edu). 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 (willis.h.lyford.mil@mail.mil).

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 (willis.h.lyford.mil@mail.mil).

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 (willis.h.lyford.mil@mail.mil).

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 (lucinda.kohn@cuanschutz.edu). 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 (lucinda.kohn@cuanschutz.edu). 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