"Our Hair, Our Strength, Our Identity": Native American reflections and what dermatologists can learn.

Issues of health equity are rightfully in the national spotlight. Here we present a narrative piece on the sacred importance of hair and its ties to cultural identity among many Native communities in the United States. We introduce unique values ascribed to hair in some Native cultures, and include examples of how hair has played an important role in both abuse and generational trauma for many individuals and families. By sharing experiences, we hope to illuminate perspectives often underrepresented, and to enable more culturally humble, responsive, and informed dermatologic care.

Psychological and professional impact of COVID-19 lockdown on French dermatologists: Data from a large survey.

AIM: To evaluate the extent to which COVID-19-related lockdown affected dermatologists. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was proposed to all French dermatologists and dermatology residents to assess the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on their professional activity, their level of stress and their psychological state, as well as their coping strategies. RESULTS: Exactly 800 dermatologists completed the survey. The respondents noted changes in behaviour in their professional and personal environment. The number of cancelled or rescheduled appointments was very high, with a huge financial impact for private practitioners. Stigmatisation was also reported. Anxiety and a feeling of increased stress were very frequent. Increased substance use was also reported. CONCLUSION: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown was significant for French dermatologists, with risks to their own health, profound changes in their practice, and financial and psychological impact, but also the development of new consultation and evaluation strategies to improve their work-life balance.

A strategy for empowering clinicians and increasing innovation: the Magic Wand Initiative.

Clinicians play a critical role in recognizing, initiating, and adopting innovative solutions to clinical problems. Increasing clinician involvement in problem-based innovation will help identify and solve unmet medical needs. The overall objective of our program was to increase clinician involvement in problem-based innovation. We pioneered and piloted the "Magic Wand" Initiative (MWI) at Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Dermatology, by inviting clinical faculty to voluntarily participate in problem-driven innovation. The primary outcome was the number of unmet clinical needs identified and pursued by clinicians, who were 'activated' to initiate problem-based innovation. Other objectives were to enhance clinician-to-clinician dialogue and to develop specific strategic framework for clinician-led, problem-driven research. This pilot MWI was started in 2013 with an announcement at dermatology faculty meeting inviting all clinical faculty to participate on volunteer basis. Academic dermatologists were the main participants in this program. They also contacted, collaborated and worked with research faculty, industry experts and lawyers. Out of 30 unmet needs identified by clinicians participating in MWI, eight are actively being pursued by clinicians. Three of those cases presented here have achieved publications, grant funding, prototype devices and product for patient use. In conclusion, MWI is an innovative approach that educates and equips clinician to identify and solve problems and engages them as leaders in their healthcare ecosystem. MWI has achieved concrete measurable success, affirming that if clinicians are empowered and supported to identify and solve existing unmet medical problems, new and innovative solutions can be invented to improve patient care.

Mental distress in dermatologists during COVID-19 pandemic: Assessment and risk factors in a global, cross-sectional study.

There is a sparsity of data regarding the mental health status of dermatologists during COVID-19 pandemic. Evaluate the effects of pandemic on mental health of dermatologists on a large scale and identify risk factors for mental distress. 733 dermatologists were included in this cross-sectional, web-based survey. Mental distress was reported by 77.2% of responders. Considerable percentages of participants experienced stress (73.9%), irritation (33.7%), insomnia (30%), or depression (27.6%), and 78.6% were overwhelmed with the amount of pandemic information they were receiving. Mental distress was significantly associated with practice years, volume of patients seen per week before pandemic, personal protective equipment availability at hospital (P = .001 for each), practice location (continent; P < .001), and participant's assessment that the healthcare system was not equipped for the pandemic (P = .003). Stress was associated with hospital service (P = .003), and depression with being overwhelmed with the amount of pandemic information received (P = .004). In a logistic model, teledermatology use was the most powerful predictor of mental distress (OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.07-2.32]). Mental distress was common among dermatologists during this pandemic. Teledermatology use was the most powerful predictor of mental distress. Preventative strategies and psychosocial interventions should be implemented.

Knowledge and Influence of Predatory Journals in Dermatology: A Pan-Austrian Survey.

The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge and influence of predatory journals in the field of dermatology in Austria. A total of 286 physicians (50.5% men) completed a questionnaire. The vast majority of subjects read scientific articles (n = 281, 98.3%) and took them into consideration in their clinical decision-making (n = 271, 98.5% of participants that regularly read scientific literature). Open access was known by 161 (56.3%), predatory journals by 84 (29.4%), and the Beall's list by 19 physicians (6.7%). A total of 117 participants (40.9%) had been challenged by patients with results from the scientific literature, including 9 predatory papers. Participants who knew of predatory journals had a higher level of education as well as scientific experience, and were more familiar with the open-access system (p < 0.001). These results indicate that the majority of dermatologists are not familiar with predatory journals. This is particularly the case for physicians in training and in the early stages of their career.

The Current State of Dermatologists' Familiarity and Perspectives of Biosimilars for the Treatment of Psoriasis: A Global Cross-Sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Biologic patent expiration, accelerated approval pathways, and business interests of third party payers and the biopharmaceutical industry are driving the development of biosimilars to treat immune-mediated disorders like psoriasis. No studies have investigated dermatologists' familiarity and perspectives of biosimilars.

OBJECTIVES: To assess: (1) dermatologists' familiarity with biosimilars and interchangeability and (2) their perspectives toward biosimilar properties, including interchangeability, indication extrapolation, and immunogenicity risk.

METHODS: For this prospective survey study, we distributed electronic and paper questionnaires to dermatologists from selected societies and attendees at the 73rd annual American Academy of Dermatology meeting between March 20, 2015 and May 30, 2015. Primary outcome was dermatologists' familiarity with biosimilars. Secondary aims included dermatologists' confidence in biosimilar efficacy and safety, familiarity concerning the concept of interchangeability and perspectives regarding indication extrapolation, interchangeability, and immunogenicity risk.

RESULTS: Of the 116 total dermatologists who completed the questionnaire, 73 (62.9%) were slightly to very unfamiliar with biosimilars. On a 5-point Likert scale, dermatologists were somewhat to very concerned with the practice of interchangeability (3.4±1.1) and slightly uncomfortable to fairly comfortable in prescribing biosimilars for an extrapolated indication (3.3±1.0).

CONCLSUIONS: Our survey identified that the majority of dermatologists were unfamiliar with biosimilars. Dermatologists were consistently concerned regarding safety issues surrounding the practice of interchangeability without provider knowledge.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(4):336-343.

Medical Malpractice in Dermatology-Part II: What To Do Once You Have Been Served with a Lawsuit.

Facing a malpractice lawsuit can be a daunting and traumatic experience for healthcare practitioners, with most clinicians naïve to the legal landscape. It is crucial for physicians to know and understand the malpractice system and his or her role once challenged with litigation. We present part II of a two-part series addressing the most common medicolegal questions that cause a great deal of anxiety. Part I focused upon risk-management strategies and prevention of malpractice lawsuits, whereas part II provides helpful suggestions and guidance for the physician who has been served with a lawsuit complaint. Herein, we address the best approach concerning what to do and what not to do after receipt of a legal claim, during the deposition, and during the trial phases. We also discuss routine concerns that may arise during the development of the case, including the personal, financial, and career implications of a malpractice lawsuit and how these can be best managed. The defense strategies discussed in this paper are not a guide separate from legal representation to winning a lawsuit, but may help physicians prepare for and cope with a medical malpractice lawsuit. This article is written from a US perspective, and therefore not all of the statements made herein will be applicable in other countries. Within the USA, medical practitioners must be familiar with their own state and local laws and should consult with their own legal counsel to obtain advice about specific questions.