Association of teledermatology workflows with standardising co-management of rashes by primary care physicians and dermatologists.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with a rash, the effect of teledermatology workflow on utilization has not been defined. We compared utilization across four teledermatology workflows in patients with a rash. METHODS: The observational longitudinal cohort study included 28,857 Kaiser Permanente Northern California members with a new rash diagnosis seen in primary care and with dermatology advice obtained using teledermatology. The workflows differed in camera and image quality; who took the picture; how the image was forwarded; and synchronicity and convenience. RESULTS: On average, 23% of patients had a follow-up office visit in dermatology within 90 days of their primary care visit. In multivariable analysis, the four technologies differed substantially in the likelihood of a follow-up dermatology office visit. In contrast, the likelihood was only negligibly related to medical centre or primary care provider. DISCUSSION: Technologies and workflows that offer the mobility of a smartphone with a high level of synchronicity in communication were associated with standardised co-management of rashes.

Cohort and nested case-control study of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in solid organ transplant recipients, by medication.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge is needed about the risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) using contemporary immunosuppressive regimens. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the risk of cSCC in relation to medications used by SOTRs. METHODS: The cohort and nest case-control study included 3308 SOTRs and 65,883 persons without transplantation during 2009-2019. Incident cSCC was identified from pathology data, and medications were identified from pharmacy data. Adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards analysis, with voriconazole examined as a time-dependent variable. RESULTS: The annual incidence of cSCC was 1.69% in SOTRs and 0.30% in persons without transplantation. The adjusted hazard ratio of cSCC associated with lung transplant was 14.83 (95% CI, 9.85-22.33) for lung and 6.53-10.69 for other organs. Risk in Latinx persons was higher than in other non-White groups. Among lung recipients, the hazard ratio was 1.14 for each month of voriconazole use (95% CI, 1.04-1.26). Azathioprine use for ≥7 months, relating to mycophenolate mofetil intolerance, was associated with a 4.22-fold increased risk of cSCC (95% CI, 1.90-9.40). Belatacept and other immunsuppressive medications were not associated with risk. LIMITATION: The number of events was somewhat small. CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge of risks and benefits in diverse patients can translate to improvements in care.

Ten-Year Follow-up of Persons With Sun-Damaged Skin Associated With Subsequent Development of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: Risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) after the diagnosis of actinic keratosis (AK) has not been studied during long follow-up periods. Objective: To estimate the risk up to 10 years and identify risk factors for cSCC development. Design, Setting, and Participants: This longitudinal cohort study, performed from January 1, 2009, to February 29, 2020, examined Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients with AK and control patients matched 1:1 on age, sex, race/ethnicity, medical center, and date of the initial diagnosis plus 30 days in the patients with AK. Exposures: Patients with AK and control participants were followed up for up to 10 years for incidence of cSCC. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incident cSCC was obtained from pathologic data, and subdistribution hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, accounting for competing risks, calendar year, demographic factors, and number of AKs. Results: The study included 220 236 patients with AK and 220 236 matched control patients (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [12.2] years; 231 248 [52.5%] female). After losses to follow-up were accounted for, risk of cSCC increased with each year of follow-up by 1.92% (95% CI, 1.89%-1.95%) in patients with AK and 0.83% (95% CI, 0.81%-0.85%) in matched control patients (subdistribution HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.85-1.95). However, among patients 49 years or younger, those diagnosed with AK were nearly 7 times more likely to be diagnosed with cSCC than those without AK (HR, 6.77; 95% CI, 5.50-8.32). At 10 years, the cumulative incidence of cSCC reached 17.1% (95% CI, 16.9%-17.4%) in patients with AK and 5.7% (95% CI, 5.5%-5.9%) in control patients. Increased numbers of AKs were modestly associated with increased cSCC risk (≥15 AKs vs 1 AK: subdistribution HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.75-2.04). Older patients had much higher risk of cSCC than younger patients (compared with those ≤49 years of age at AK diagnosis; ≥80 years of age: subdistribution HR, 8.18; 95% CI, 7.62-8.78). Other than AK, risk factors for cSCC included older age, White race (a proxy for skin type), history of basal cell carcinoma, and male sex. Risk decreased between 2009 and 2019 (2018-2019 vs 2009-2010: subdistribution HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.63-0.72). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this longitudinal cohort study can be used to develop recommendations to increase early detection of cSCC. Additional research is needed to understand the effect of AK treatment on cSCC risk and outcomes of cSCC.

Comanagement of Rashes by Primary Care Providers and Dermatologists: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a high demand for managing skin disease, and dermatologists are in short supply. OBJECTIVES: To better understand how rashes and other specific skin conditions are co-managed by primary care providers (PCPs) and dermatologists, we estimated the frequency with which PCPs sought consultation with or referral to dermatology and the proportion of patients who had a follow-up dermatology office visit in the following 90 days. DESIGN AND SETTING: The retrospective longitudinal study included 106,459 patients with a skin condition diagnosed by 3,830 PCPs, from January 2017 to March 2017. METHODS: Comprehensive electronic medical record data with generalized linear mixed modeling accounted for patient factors including diagnosis and clustering by medical center and PCP. RESULTS: PCPs escalated 9% of patients to dermatology through consultation or referral, while 5% required a follow-up dermatology office visit within 90 days. Patients with bullous, hair, or pigment conditions or psoriasis were most likely to be escalated. Clustering of escalation and follow-up visits was minimal in relation to medical center (intraclass correlation, 0.04 for both outcomes) or PCP (escalation, intraclass correlation, 0.16; follow-up visits, 0.09). DISCUSSION: Improving primary care education in skin disease and, for certain skin conditions, standardizing approaches to workup, treatment, and escalation may further streamline care and reduce pressure on the dermatologist workforce. CONCLUSION: PCPs managed 91% of rashes without consultation or referral to dermatology, and the frequency of patients scheduled for dermatology office visits after primary care was similar from one PCP to another.

Presentation of Rash in a Community-Based Health System.

INTRODUCTION: Coordination of care between primary care providers and dermatologists is important to ensure high quality and cost efficiency. In our integrated care setting, we used a retrospective cohort study to assess which patients self-refer to dermatology and which returned for a follow-up visit in dermatology. METHODS: We identified 107,832 patients with a new rash diagnosis who presented to primary care or dermatology between January and March 2017. We compared patients who self-referred to dermatology with those who used primary care, using multi-level generalized estimating equations with adjustment for patient-level covariables and medical center. We also characterized patients who returned for a follow-up visit in dermatology. RESULTS: Among patients with a new rash diagnosis, 99% were originally seen in primary care. Patients with a history of a dermatological condition were more likely to present to dermatology. Patients with a history of a dermatological condition or with psoriasis, pigment, hair, bullous, or multiple conditions were more likely to have a follow-up visit with a dermatologist. For each outcome, initial location of care and return for a follow-up visit, we found minimal clustering by medical center or provider. CONCLUSION: One percent of patients with a new rash diagnosis self-refer to dermatology in this setting. Patients with a history of a dermatological condition were more likely to self-refer to dermatology and to have a follow-up visit with a dermatologist. Individual dermatologists and primary care providers had little impact on a patient's odds of returning for a follow-up visit.

Comparative effectiveness study of face-to-face and teledermatology workflows for diagnosing skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness and value of teledermatology and face-to-face workflows for diagnosing lesions are not adequately understood. OBJECTIVE: We compared the risks of biopsy and cancer diagnosis among 2 face-to-face workflows (direct referral and roving dermatologist) and 4 teledermatology workflows. METHODS: Retrospective study of 59,279 primary care patients presenting with a lesion from January through June 2017. RESULTS: One teledermatology workflow achieved high-resolution images with use of a dermatoscope-fitted digital camera, a picture archiving and communication system, and image retrieval to a large computer monitor (in contrast to a smartphone screen). Compared with direct referral, this workflow was associated with a 9% greater probability of cancer detection (95% confidence interval [CI], 2%-16%), a 4% lower probability of biopsy (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-0.99), and 39% fewer face-to-face visits (relative risk, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.57-0.65). Other workflows were less effective. LIMITATIONS: Differing proficiencies across teledermatology workflows and selection of patients for direct referral could have caused bias. CONCLUSION: Implementation is critical to the effectiveness of teledermatology.