The Teledermatology Experience: Cost Savings and Image Quality Control.

Introduction: Teledermatology adoption continues to increase, in part, spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study analyzes the utility and cost savings of a store-and-forward teledermatology consultative system within the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Methods: Retrospective cohort of 4,493 patients across 14 remote sites in Tennessee and Kentucky from May 2017 through August 2019. The study measured the agreement between the teledermatology diagnoses and follow-up face-to-face clinic evaluations as well as the cost effectiveness of the teledermatology program over the study period. Results: Fifty-four percent of patients were recommended for face-to-face appointment for biopsy or further evaluation. Most patients, 80.5% received their face-to-face care by a VA dermatologist. There was a high level of concordance between teledermatologist and clinic dermatologist for pre-malignant and malignant cutaneous conditions. Veterans were seen faster at a VA clinic compared with a community dermatology site. Image quality improved as photographers incorporated teledermatologist feedback. From a cost perspective, teledermatology saved the VA system $1,076,000 in community care costs. Discussion: Teledermatology is a useful diagnostic tool within the VA system providing Veteran care at a cost savings.

Expert Consensus on Nail Procedures and Selection of CPT Codes.

BACKGROUND: Dermatologists specialize in treating conditions of the skin, hair, and nails; however, it is our experience that the field of nail diseases is the least discussed facet of dermatology. Even less acknowledged is the complexity of nail procedures and how best to accurately code for these procedures. OBJECTIVE: To convene a panel of experts in nail disease to reach consensus on the most accurate and appropriate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes associated with the most commonly performed nail procedures. METHODS: A questionnaire including 9 of the most commonly performed nail procedures and potential CPT codes was sent to experts in the treatment of nail disease, defined as those clinicians running a nail subspecialty clinic and performing nail procedures with regularity. A conference call was convened to discuss survey results. RESULTS: Unanimous consensus was reached on the appropriate CPT codes associated with all discussed procedures. LIMITATIONS: Although this article details the most commonly performed nail procedures, many were excluded and billing for these procedures continues to be largely subjective. This article is meant to serve as a guide for clinicians but should not be impervious to interpretation in specific clinical situations. CONCLUSION: Billing of nail procedures remains a practice gap within our field. The authors hope that the expert consensus on the most appropriate CPT codes associated with commonly performed nail procedures will aid clinicians as they diagnose and treat disorders of the nail unit and encourage accurate and complete billing practices.

UK psychodermatology services in 2019: service provision has improved but is still very poor nationally.

BACKGROUND: Psychodermatology is an emerging subspeciality of dermatology. Psychodermatology clinics use a multidisciplinary approach to deal with psychological or psychiatric elements related to skin disease. Two previous studies in 2004 and 2012 highlighted the deficiency of psychodermatology services in the UK, despite the evidence that these services have high demand and are cost-effective. AIMS: To reassess psychodermatology service provision in the UK and outline the developments that have been made. METHODS: In conjunction with BBC Radio 5 Live, a survey questionnaire was distributed via email to the UK membership of the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) and Psychodermatology UK. The survey consisted of 13 questions asking about the availability of psychodermatology services. RESULTS: Basic percentages were used to analyse quantitative data, and content analysis was used for qualitative data. Our results showed that less than a quarter of the respondents (24%) have access to a nearby dedicated psychodermatology service. Additionally, the psychodermatology units do not have a unified configuration and clinical provision model differs nationally. Only around 5% of the clinicians have access to a clinic that provides psychology-dermatology-oncology service, and even fewer have access to a paediatric psychodermatology (4.8%). Engagement in psychodermatology research was reported by around 12% of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: The psychocutaneous services in the UK have improved to some extent over the past decade; the service has become more widely available nationally, and the investment in research is promising. However, it is still insufficient and unable to fulfil patient demand, especially for vulnerable individuals such as children and dermato-oncology patients.

Differences in Outpatient Dermatology Encounter Work Relative Value Units and Net Payments by Patient Race, Sex, and Age.

Importance: Clinical productivity measures may be factors in financial incentives for providing care to specific patient populations and thus may perpetuate inequitable health care. Objective: To identify the association of patient race, age, and sex with work relative value units (wRVUs) generated by outpatient dermatology encounters. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study obtained demographic and billing data for outpatient dermatology encounters (ie, an encounter performed within a department of dermatology) from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2020, at the Emory Clinic, an academic dermatologic practice in Atlanta, Georgia. Participants included adults aged 18 years or older with available age, race, and sex data in the electronic health record system. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was wRVUs generated per encounter. Results: A total of 66 463 encounters among 30 036 unique patients were included. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 55.9 (18.5) years and were predominantly White (46 575 [70.1%]) and female (39 598 [59.6%]) individuals. In the general dermatologic practice, the mean (SD) wRVUs per encounter was 1.40 (0.71). In adjusted analysis, Black, Asian, and other races (eg, American Indian or Native American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and multiple races); female sex; and younger age were associated with fewer wRVUs per outpatient dermatology encounter. Compared with general dermatologic visits with White patients, visits with Black patients generated 0.27 (95% CI, 0.25-0.28) fewer wRVUs per encounter, visits with Asian patients generated 0.22 (95% CI, 0.20-0.25) fewer wRVUs per encounter, and visits with patients of other race generated 0.19 (95% CI, 0.14-0.24) fewer wRVUs per encounter. Female sex was also associated with 0.11 (95% CI, 0.10-0.12) fewer wRVUs per encounter, and wRVUs per encounter increased by 0.006 (95% CI, 0.006-0.006) with each 1-year increase in age. In the general dermatologic practice excluding Mohs surgeons, destruction of premalignant lesions and biopsies were mediators for the observed differences in race (56.2% [95% CI, 53.1%-59.3%] for Black race, 53.2% [95% CI, 45.6%-63.8%] for Asian race, and 53.6% [95% CI, 40.4%-77.4%] for other races), age (65.6%; 95% CI, 60.5%-71.4%), and sex (82.3%; 95% CI, 72.7%-93.1%). In a data set including encounters with Mohs surgeons, the race, age, and sex differences in wRVUs per encounter were greater than in the general dermatologic data set. Mohs surgery for basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas was a mediator for the observed differences in race (46.0% [95% CI, 42.6%-49.4%] for Black race, 41.9% [95% CI, 35.5%-49.2%] for Asian race, and 34.6% [95% CI, 13.8%-51.5%] for other races), age (49.2%; 95% CI, 44.9%-53.7%), and sex (47.9%; 95% CI, 42.0%-54.6%). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that dermatology encounters with racial minority groups, women, and younger patients generated fewer wRVUs than encounters with older White male patients. This finding suggests that physician compensation based on wRVUs may encourage the provision of services that exacerbate disparities in access to dermatologic care.

Changes in Use of Radiotherapy Among Dermatologists From 2013 to 2017.

Importance: Concerns have been raised about the use of radiotherapy (RT) by dermatologists. Little is known about temporal trends in payment for RT among dermatologists. Objective: To characterize changes in RT use and payment among dermatologists treating patients enrolled in Medicare. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional, population-based retrospective analysis of dermatologists submitting Medicare claims was conducted. Dermatologists identified in the 2013-2017 Medicare Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File, which includes information on fee-for-service payments and service use among physicians caring for Medicare beneficiaries, were included in the analysis. The study was conducted from March 18 to October 22, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Numbers and types of RT, current terminology codes billed by dermatologists, number of dermatologists providing RT services, total payments and median payments per dermatologist for RT services, total services and median services per dermatologist, and number of dermatologists billing for both RT and Mohs micrographic surgery services. Results: From 2013 to 2017, dermatologists billed RT codes, which included RT planning, preparation, delivery, and management services with varying levels of complexity. The number of dermatologists using RT increased from 115 to 198 between 2013 to 2017. Total payments and total services for RT have fluctuated over time. Median payments per dermatologist and median services provided per dermatologist for RT reached their highest level in 2017 ($80 810 and 629 services). In 2013, RT delivery was the highest reimbursed RT service type (total paid, $9 121 505). By 2017, clinical treatment planning and simulation was the highest reimbursed service type (total paid, $20 288 796). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study indicate that dermatologist use of RT continues to increase. A wide variety of RT services are billed by dermatologists. Further research is needed to ensure expanded use is safe, efficacious, and cost-effective.

Administrative Burden and Costs of Prior Authorizations in a Dermatology Department.

Importance: Insurance companies use prior authorizations (PAs) to address inappropriate prescribing or unnecessary variations in care, most often for expensive medications. Prior authorizations negatively affect patient care and add costs and administrative burden to dermatology offices. Objective: To quantify the administrative burden and costs of dermatology PAs. Design, Setting, and Participants: The University of Utah Department of Dermatology employs 2 full-time and 8 part-time PA staff. In this cross-sectional study at a large academic department spanning 11 clinical locations, these staff itemized all PA-related encounters over a 30-day period in September 2016. Staff salary and benefits were publicly available. Data were analyzed between December 2018 and August 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of visits requiring PAs, median administrative time to finalize a PA (either approval or denial after appeal), and median cost per PA type. Results: In September 2016, 626 PAs were generated from 9512 patient encounters. Staff spent 169.7 hours directly handling PAs, costing a median of $6.72 per PA. Biologic PAs cost a median of $15.80 each and took as long as 31 business days to complete. The costliest PA equaled 106% of the associated visit's Medicare reimbursement rate. Approval rates were 99.6% for procedures, 78.9% for biologics, and 58.2% for other medications. After appeal, 5 of 23 (21.7%) previously denied PAs were subsequently approved. Conclusions and Relevance: Prior authorizations are costly to dermatology practices and their value appears limited for some requests. Fewer unnecessary PAs and appeals might increase practice efficiency and improve patient outcomes.

Why dermatology is the second least diverse specialty in medicine: How did we get here?

Dermatology is currently the second least diverse medical specialty, after orthopedic surgery, with only a minority of physicians identifying as underrepresented in medicine (UIM). To diversify our specialty, our understanding and recognition of multifactorial barriers to inclusivity such as financial barriers, lack of mentorship, and the implicit bias against minorities UIM is critical. With collaborative efforts by national dermatology organizations, dermatology residency programs, and medical schools to increase the presence of UIM dermatology physicians in the US health care, this important issue continues to receive the attention it deserves.

Stem cells in aesthetic dermatology: bioethical and professional obligations.

Recently, stem cells in aesthetics have attracted increased attention, especially as they have become a popular trend that is being mass-marketed to consumers on the Internet and social media. Unfortunately, studies have shown this marketing to be misleading as it portrays many purported benefits of stem cells that have yet to be proven in the limited studies that are available. It is important for clinicians to understand the evidence and marketing behind any new trends, especially in the fast-paced world of aesthetics, where treatments often outpace current medical understanding. As clinicians, we have bioethical and professional obligations to educate ourselves on current trends, ensure adequate patient safety, and advocate for continued consumer education.

Augmented reality in dermatology: Are we ready for AR?

Augmented reality (AR) refers to a group of technologies that capture, analyze, and superimpose digital information onto the real world. This information gives health care providers unique and useful perspectives that can enhance patient care. AR has been utilized in selected scenarios in health care for several decades, notably laparoscopic surgery and vein finding. In recent years, improved wireless technologies, computing power, and analytics are leading to rapid growth in the AR industry. Novel health care-specific use cases are rapidly being introduced with the potential to widely affect clinical care, particularly in dermatology because of the visual nature of the field. In this article, we define AR, profile clinical and educational uses of AR in dermatology, and discuss key policy considerations for the safe and appropriate use of this emerging technology.

Office-based dermatologic diagnostic procedure utilization in the United States Medicare population from 2000-2016.

BACKGROUND: Potassium hydroxide preparations (KOH) and tissue examinations for ova and parasites (O&P) are cost-effective office-based tests. No studies have quantified their utilization and economic impact. METHODS: The objective is to determine the billing patterns and costs of office-based diagnostic procedures in the Medicare population. We conducted a cross sectional study using the Part B National Summary Data File (2000-2016) and the Physician and Other Supplier Public Use File (2012-2015) released by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. RESULTS: In 2016, the total number of claims among all providers was 28,432 (KOH) and 52,182 (O&P), representing a decrease since 2000 (KOH, -41.8%; O&P, -43.4%). The total claims for in-office procedures by dermatologists per 10,000 beneficiaries decreased between 2012 and 2015 (KOH, -18.8%; O&P, -26.6%). Fewer dermatologists submitted claims for the tests (KOH, -11.3%; O&P, -16.6%). The total single (SB) and multiple (MB) biopsy claims by dermatologists per 10,000 beneficiaries decreased between 2012 and 2015 (SB, -1.8%; MB, -2.7%). The 2016 aggregate payments (% change since 2000) for KOH and O&P were $163,127.75 (-60.4%) and $299,074.18 (-61.6%), respectively; for SB and MB, they were $240,047,487.98 (+142.3%) and $38,214,117.22 (+79.2%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Fewer dermatologists submit claims for KOH and O&P each year. Future studies should evaluate whether this is due to a loss of cost-efficacy, and secondly, if it is related to decreased reimbursement, burdensome in-office laboratory regulations, or changing provider preferences.

Utilization and cost of electronic brachytherapy by dermatologists from 2012 to 2015.

Electronic brachytherapy (EBT) garnered interest among dermatologists as a noninvasive treatment for keratinocyte carcinomas. While the magnitude of use and cost burden had not yet been quantified, this interest prompted an official statement from the American Academy of Dermatology supporting its use as secondary option in special circumstances, and led to changes to billing and coding for the procedure. Using provider level Medicare claims, this study demonstrates increased use of EBT between 2012 and 2015. We also showed that very few dermatologists utilized EBT, with only 39 dermatologists billing for EBT in 2015. This study documents that large scale policy changes were implemented in response to the practice behaviors of a small number of dermatologists, and provides information regarding the cost of EBT for consideration on how to best optimize its use in clinical practice.

The national burden of inpatient dermatology in adults.

BACKGROUND: Management of inpatient skin disease represents a unique subspecialty within dermatology. OBJECTIVE: To assess the national burden of inpatient dermatology in adults. METHODS: Using the 2014 National Inpatient Sample, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adults hospitalized for dermatologic conditions. RESULTS: In 2014, there were 644,320 weighted hospitalizations principally for skin disease in adults, which cost the health care system $5.04 billion. Overall, skin disease was diagnosed in 1 in 8 hospitalized adults. Dermatologic hospitalizations were associated with a lack of medical insurance (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.20-2.34), residence in a low-income community (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13), and small (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.23-1.32) or rural hospitals (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.32-1.44). Racial minorities were less likely to be hospitalized for skin disease than were whites (for blacks: OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.79; for Hispanics: OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.8; for Asians: OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.55-0.64). Only 0.47% of patients admitted for skin disease experienced in-hospital mortality; however, mortality rates were high in hospitalizations for cutaneous lymphomas (9.19%) and malignant melanoma (6.54%). LIMITATIONS: We could not assess the impact of inpatient dermatology consultations on hospitalization outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Skin disease is highly prevalent among hospitalized patients.

Use and Cost of Actinic Keratosis Destruction in the Medicare Part B Fee-for-Service Population, 2007 to 2015.

Importance: Actinic keratosis is prevalent and has the potential to progress to keratinocyte carcinoma. Changes in the use and costs of actinic keratosis treatment are not well understood in the aging population. Objective: To evaluate trends in the use and costs of actinic keratosis destruction in Medicare patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: A billing claims analysis was performed of the Medicare Part B Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files and National Summary Data of premalignant skin lesion destructions performed from 2007 to 2015 among Medicare Part B fee-for-service beneficiaries. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean number of actinic keratosis lesions destroyed and associated treatment payments in 2015 US dollars estimated per 1000 Medicare Part B fee-for-service beneficiaries. Data analysis was performed from November 2017 to July 2018. Results: More than 35.6 million actinic keratosis lesions were treated in 2015, increasing from 29.7 million in 2007. Treated actinic keratosis lesions per 1000 beneficiaries increased from 917 in 2007 to 1051 in 2015, while mean inflation-adjusted payments per 1000 patients decreased from $11 749 to $10 942 owing to reimbursement cuts. The proportion of actinic keratosis lesions treated by independently billing nurse practitioners and physician assistants increased from 4.0% in 2007 to 13.5% in 2015. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest that actinic keratosis imposes continuously increasing levels of treatment burden in the Medicare fee-for-service population. Reimbursement decreases have been used to control rising costs of actinic keratosis treatment. Critical research may be warranted to optimize access to actinic keratosis treatment and value for prevention of keratinocyte carcinoma.

Public Perception of Ethical Issues in Dermatology: Evidenced by New York Times Commenters.

BACKGROUND: A 2017 New York Times (NYT) article questioning the appropriateness of skin cancer treatment modality by dermatology providers stimulated discussion among the public pertaining to ethics in the current state of dermatologic practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to characterize issues raised by the comments on the NYT article, discuss strategies to address these concerns, and encourage reflection on ethics in dermatologic care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative analysis was performed on the 309 comments on the NYT article. General themes were identified, resulting in the inclusion of 222 comments. These comments were reviewed and characterized by the type of commenter, his or her stance on health care, and what issues they raised. RESULTS: Providers interested in "profit over patient" was the most common theme, followed by mistrust of APPs, health care system interested in "profit over patient," inadequate supervision by advanced practice providers (APPs), finding the "right" provider, support for coordinated APP and physician care, support for APP credentials, and finally inappropriate elderly care. CONCLUSION: The NYT article raises the concern of identifying quality care and choosing the "right provider"-one who successfully balances the various incentives affecting skin cancer management including appropriate usage of APPs.