Asunto(s)
Colagogos y Coleréticos/administración & dosificación , Técnicas Cosméticas/efectos adversos , Ácido Desoxicólico/administración & dosificación , Grasa Subcutánea/efectos de los fármacos , Bencimidazoles , Mentón , Colagogos y Coleréticos/efectos adversos , Ácido Desoxicólico/efectos adversos , Combinación de Medicamentos , Femenino , Hepatitis C Crónica/complicaciones , Hepatitis C Crónica/diagnóstico , Hepatitis C Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatitis C Crónica/virología , Humanos , Hígado/efectos de los fármacos , Cirrosis Hepática/diagnóstico , Cirrosis Hepática/tratamiento farmacológico , Cirrosis Hepática/virología , Pruebas de Función Hepática , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pirrolidinas , Quinoxalinas , Sulfonamidas , Resultado del TratamientoAsunto(s)
Sarcoptes scabiei , Escabiosis , Animales , Humanos , Microscopía Confocal , Escabiosis/diagnóstico , Escabiosis/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Early detection of melanoma improves survival. Since many melanoma patients and their spouses seek the care of a physician after discovering their melanoma, an ongoing study will determine the efficacy of teaching at-risk melanoma patients and their skin check partner how to conduct skin self-examinations (SSEs). Internet-based health behavior interventions have proven efficacious in creating behavior change in patients to better prevent, detect, or cope with their health issues. The efficacy of electronic interactive SSE educational intervention provided on a tablet device has not previously been determined. OBJECTIVE: The electronic interactive educational intervention was created to develop a scalable, effective intervention to enhance performance and accuracy of SSE among those at-risk to develop melanoma. The intervention in the office was conducted using one of the following three methods: (1) in-person through a facilitator, (2) with a paper workbook, or (3) with a tablet device used in the clinical office. Differences related to method of delivery were elucidated by having the melanoma patient and their skin check partner provide a self-report of their confidence in performing SSE and take a knowledge-based test immediately after receiving the intervention. METHODS: The three interventions used 9 of the 26 behavioral change techniques defined by Abraham and Michie to promote planning of monthly SSE, encourage performing SSE, and reinforce self-efficacy by praising correct responses to knowledge-based decision making and offering helpful suggestions to improve performance. In creating the electronic interactive SSE educational intervention, the educational content was taken directly from both the scripted in-person presentation delivered with Microsoft PowerPoint by a trained facilitator and the paper workbook training arms of the study. Enrollment totaled 500 pairs (melanoma patient and their SSE partner) with randomization of 165 pairs to the in-person, 165 pairs to the workbook, and 70 pairs to electronic interactive SSE educational intervention. RESULTS: The demographic survey data showed no significant mean differences between groups in age, education, or income. The tablet usability survey given to the first 30 tablet pairs found that, overall, participants found the electronic interactive intervention easy to use and that the video of the doctor-patient-partner dialogue accompanying the dermatologist's examination was particularly helpful in understanding what they were asked to do for the study. The interactive group proved to be just as good as the workbook group in self-confidence of scoring moles, and just as good as both the workbook and the in-person intervention groups in self-confidence of monitoring their moles. While the in-person intervention performed significantly better on a skill-based quiz, the electronic interactive group performed significantly better than the workbook group. The electronic interactive and in-person interventions were more efficient (30 minutes), while the workbook took longer (45 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that an electronic interactive intervention can deliver skills training comparable to other training methods, and the experience can be accommodated during the customary outpatient office visit with the physician. Further testing of the electronic interactive intervention's role in the anxiety of the pair and pair-discovered melanomas upon self-screening will elucidate the impact of these tools on outcomes in at-risk patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01013844; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01013844 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6LvGGSTKK).
Asunto(s)
Internet , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Autoexamen , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Precoz , Humanos , Educación del Paciente como AsuntoRESUMEN
IMPORTANCE: Determining Fitzpatrick skin phototypes (FST) allows physicians to assess a person's risk of developing sunburn and, by extension, the need for sun protection to prevent the development of skin cancer. Reflectance spectrophotometry objectively measures the melanin index and can assist in determining the accuracy of self-report of FST compared with dermatologist-determined FST. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether self-reported or dermatologist-determined FST is more accurate in identifying a participant's FST for FST I through VI and to assess the relevance of the burning and tanning measures for a range of skin types among ethnically diverse participants. DESIGN AND SETTING: A convenience sample of participants in an observational study from June 2, 2010, through December 15, 2010, at an ambulatory academic dermatologic practice and employee health center in an urban city. PARTICIPANTS: Participants, staff, and students of Northwestern University, who self-identified as being non-Hispanic white, Hispanic or Latino, Asian or Pacific Islander, or black. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Melanin index as measured with reflectance spectrophotometry compared with dermatologist- and participant-determined FST. RESULTS: Forty-two percent (114 of 270) of the participants' responses to the burning and tanning questions could not be classified using standard FST definitions. The spectrophotometry measurements for dermatologist-determined FST were significantly different for FST III and IV (P < .001) and FST IV and V (P < .001). The spectrophotometry measurements for participant-determined FST were significantly different for FST III and IV (P < .001) but not for FST IV and V (P = .90). Participant responses to burning and the dermatologist-determined FST were significantly correlated (Spearman ρ, 0.764; P < .001). Participant responses to tanning and the dermatologist-determined FST were not significantly correlated (Spearman ρ, 0.089; P = .15). Spectrophotometry measurements assessing FST were statistically significantly different for FST III through VI (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Dermatologist-determined FST is more accurate than self-report for FST III through VI. Rephrasing the questions using specific descriptors that have meaning to people with skin of color, such as skin irritation, tenderness, itching, or skin becoming darker, may allow physicians to more accurately assign a skin phototype and, by inference, assess the risk of these participants developing skin cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01124513.