Epidemiology and Healthcare Expenditure for Skin Disease in Emergency Departments in Alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the epidemiology and costs associated with managing dermatologic conditions in emergency departments (EDs). OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence and mean cost per case of skin diseases in EDs in Alberta. METHODS: Alberta Health Services' Interactive Health Data Application was used to determine the epidemiology and costs associated with nonneoplastic dermatologic diseases in EDs in the province of Alberta, Canada, from 2018 to 2022. Skin conditions were identified using the International Classification of Disease 10th edition diagnostic groupings. RESULTS: Skin disease represented 3.59% of all ED presentations in Alberta in 2022. The total costs associated with managing dermatologic conditions have remained stable over time at approximately 15 million Canadian Dollars (CAD) annually, but the mean cost per case has risen from 188.88 (SD 15.42) in 2018 to 246.25 CAD (SD 27.47) in 2022 (7.59%/year). Infections of skin and subcutaneous tissue were the most expensive diagnostic grouping. The most common dermatologic diagnostic groupings presenting to the ED were infections of skin and subcutaneous tissue [mean age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) of 143.67 per 100,000 standard population (SD 241.99)], urticaria and erythema [mean ASIR 33.57 per 100,000 standard population (SD 59.13)], and dermatitis and eczema [mean ASIR 18.59 per 100,000 standard population (SD 23.65)]. Cellulitis was both the most common and the costliest individual diagnosis. The majority of patients were triaged as less urgent or nonurgent. CONCLUSIONS: Skin disease represents a substantial public health burden in EDs. Further research into drivers of cost change and areas for cost savings is essential.

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.

Role of phototherapy in the era of biologics.

Phototherapy is a safe and effective treatment for many dermatologic conditions. With the advent of novel biologics and small molecule inhibitors, it is important to critically evaluate the role of phototherapy in dermatology. Surveys have shown that many dermatology residency programs do not dedicate time to teaching residents how to prescribe or administer phototherapy. Limitations of phototherapy include access to a center, time required for treatments, and insurance approval. Home phototherapy, a viable option, is also underused. However, it should be emphasized that modern phototherapy has been in use for over 40 years, has an excellent safety profile, and does not require laboratory monitoring. It can be safely combined with many other treatment modalities, including biologics and small molecule inhibitors. In addition, phototherapy costs significantly less than these novel agents. Dermatologists are the only group of physicians who have the expertise and proper training to deliver this treatment modality to our patients. Therefore, to continue to deliver high-quality, cost-effective care, it is imperative that phototherapy be maintained as an integral part of the dermatology treatment armamentarium.

Provision of Dermatologic Care in a Universal Health Care System: A 17-Year Review.

BACKGROUND: Limited data is available on the burden of dermatologic disease including disease distribution and providers of care. Research is needed to facilitate health care planning and improve patient care. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the demographics and economics of the provision of dermatologic care in a universal health care system from fiscal year 2000 to 2016. METHODS: A retrospective population-based analysis was performed on physician billing claims for dermatologic conditions from April 1, 2000 to March 31, 2017. Data came from the province of Ontario's universal health care plan claims records accessed through IntelliHealth. RESULTS: Dermatologic claims made up 3.6% of all physician claims, with a 20% increase seen over time. The cost of dermatologic claims increased by 70% between fiscal 2000 and 2016, with the average cost per claim increasing by 41%. However, the cost of dermatologic claims as a percentage of all health care claims experienced a decline from 3.5% in fiscal 2000 to 2.8% in fiscal 2016. Over the study period, family physicians submitted 56% to 62% of dermatologic claims, dermatologists 24% to 29%, pediatricians 3% to 4%, and internists 1%. Overall, internists billed the highest average cost per dermatologic claim ranging from $39 in 2000 to $60 in 2016, followed by pediatricians at $33 to $58, dermatologists at $28 to $39, and family physicians at $23 to $30. CONCLUSIONS: The demographic and economic burden of dermatologic disease is changing over time, with implications for health care planning, advancing medical education, and patient care.

The growth of teledermatology: Expanding to reach the underserved.

The regulation of telemedicine in the United States is evolving, with new legislation expanding reimbursement and cross-state licensing capabilities. As telemedicine grows, communities with limited access to traditional dermatologic care may find a solution in teledermatology. A search of the medical literature and online health care law resources published within the past decade was performed to assess the current status of telemedicine availability, health record integration and security, reimbursement policy, and licensure requirements in the United States, with a focus on teledermatology. The majority of states have implemented policies requiring private insurance coverage. Medicaid reimburses some form of telemedicine in all states but restricts which modalities can be used and by which specialties. Medicare places the heaviest limitations on telemedicine coverage. Twenty-four states and Guam are members of the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC), and 27 states offer alternative cross-state practice options. With the advent of publicly and privately funded programs, volunteer efforts, and mobile applications, teledermatology is more readily available to rural and underserved communities.

Evaluating the effect of prior authorizations in patients with complex dermatologic conditions.

BACKGROUND: In dermatology, prior authorizations can delay treatment, decrease patient adherence, and deter providers from advocating for their patients. Patients with complex dermatologic conditions, often requiring off-label treatments, may face particularly significant insurance barriers. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of prior authorizations in patients with complex dermatologic conditions. METHODS: This prospective cohort study assessed patients treated by a dermatologist during 5 months who specialized in complex dermatology. Patients included were older than 18 years, treated at V.P.W.'s rheumatology-dermatology clinic, and prescribed a medication or ordered a diagnostic procedure that elicited an insurance prior authorization. Data on prior authorization outcome, administrative time, and delay to treatment were collected. RESULTS: Of 51 prior authorizations, 51% were initially denied, with systemic medications more likely denied than topical ones (P < .001). Total administrative time spent on 50 prior authorizations tracked was 62.5 hours (median time per prior authorization 30 minutes [interquartile range 17-105 minutes]). Time to access treatment was tracked for 80% of prior authorizations; median delay was 12 days [interquartile range 5.5-23 days]. LIMITATIONS: Single-center, single-provider patient panel. CONCLUSION: Patients with complex dermatologic conditions face a significant barrier to care because of prior authorizations. The administrative burden for provider practices to address these prior authorizations is substantial and may warrant a streamlined system in collaboration with insurers.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology: Where are we now, and what are the barriers to adoption?

There has been rapid growth in teledermatology over the past decade, and teledermatology services are increasingly being used to support patient care across a variety of care settings. Teledermatology has the potential to increase access to high-quality dermatologic care while maintaining clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Recent expansions in telemedicine reimbursement from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ensure that teledermatology will play an increasingly prominent role in patient care. Therefore, it is important that dermatologists be well informed of both the promises of teledermatology and the potential practice challenges a continuously evolving mode of care delivery brings. In this article, we will review the evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of teledermatology and we will discuss system-level and practice-level barriers to successful teledermatology implementation as well as potential implications for dermatologists.

Dermatology-specific and all-cause 30-day and calendar-year readmissions and costs for dermatologic diseases from 2010 to 2014.

BACKGROUND: Readmissions for skin disease, particularly for the same diagnosis and over time, have not been well studied. OBJECTIVE: To characterize hospital readmissions for skin disease. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study examined the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2010 to 2014, a national sample of hospital discharges in the United States. RESULTS: Of the patients in 3,602,599 dermatologic hospitalizations from 2010 to 2014, 9.8% were readmitted for any cause, 3.3% were admitted for the same diagnosis within 30 days, and 7.8% were readmitted for the same diagnosis within the calendar year (CY). The cost of all CY same-cause readmissions was $508 million per year. Mycosis fungoides had the highest 30-day all-cause readmission rate (32%), vascular hamartomas and dermatomyositis had the highest 30-day same-cause readmission rates (21% and 18%, respectively), and dermatomyositis and systemic lupus erythematosus had the highest CY same-cause readmission rates (31% and 24%, respectively). Readmission rates stayed stable from 2010 to 2014. Readmission for the same diagnosis was strongly associated with Medicaid and morbid obesity. LIMITATIONS: This study is a broad description of hospitalizations for skin disease. Conclusions for individual diseases are not intended. CONCLUSION: The rates and costs of readmissions for skin diseases remained high from 2010 to 2014. This study identifies diseases associated with high risk of hospital readmission, but disease-specific studies are needed. The diseases and risk factors presented should guide additional studies focused on strategies to reduce readmissions in specific skin diseases.

Cost analysis of a store-and-forward teledermatology consult system in Philadelphia.

BACKGROUND: Store-and-forward (SAF) teledermatology (TD) has the potential to increase access to timely, high-quality care for underserved populations. However, the cost-effectiveness of TD for underserved populations is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the potential cost savings associated with an SAF TD program implemented for an underserved population in the city health clinics of urban Philadelphia. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of SAF TD consultations for 700 outpatients managed in 12 Philadelphia primary care clinics. Primary care providers were asked to specify a treatment plan, as well as the type of care for the patient, in the absence of the TD service. Analysis compared the cost of each patient case with use of the TD consult model versus with conventional care. RESULTS: In all, 27% of in-person dermatology clinic visits (189 of 700) and 3.29% of emergency room visits (23 of 700) were avoided by using TD. Compared with conventional care, TD had a mean expected cost savings of $10.00 to $52.65 per TD consult. In sensitivity analyses, these estimated savings remained positive across a range of parameters. LIMITATIONS: The cost analysis relies on several assumptions regarding the cost of care, and indirect costs were not included. CONCLUSION: TD can be a cost-saving model while increasing access to dermatologic care.

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.

An introduction to the methods of decision-analytic modelling used in economic evaluations for Dermatologists.

Economic evaluations are used to identify which health treatments or preventions offer the most effective use of resources, or value for money. This is achieved by identifying, measuring and valuing the inputs and outcomes of alternative interventions. These evaluations are often conducted alongside clinical trials; however, these trials may end before the outcomes of economic interest have been observed and measured. An alternative to within trial economic evaluation is to use decision modelling, which can model the cost-effectiveness of interventions over an extended time period. This paper aims to provide an overview for clinicians of the different modelling techniques used within health economic evaluations and to introduce methods for critical appraisal. The most common modelling approaches, and their associated strengths and weaknesses, were discussed. Alongside this, practical examples specific to dermatology were given. These examples include studies where the model chosen or the methods used may not have been the most appropriate. Methods for critical appraisal were also highlighted. Common modelling approaches include Decision Trees, Markov Cohort, extensions to the Markov model (Monte Carlo Simulation) and Discrete Event Simulation models. Items of the Philips Checklist were discussed in the context of performing critical appraisal. Health economic decision models are multi-faceted and can often be complex. Full critical appraisal requires clinicians' unique knowledge, which is complementary to the knowledge of health economists.

Costs of isocyanate-related occupational diseases: A systematic review.

Although isocyanates are increasingly used in manufacturing and workplace exposure to isocyanates is widely recognized as one of the most frequent causes for occupational lung and skin diseases, little is known about the economic burden on the affected individual and the society. This study provides an overview on costs of occupational diseases related to isocyanates. We performed a systematic literature search of studies in the electronic databases of the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information, and the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. We extracted the key characteristics of the studies and performed a study quality assessment. We identified eight studies on the costs of illness, of which five focused on occupational lung diseases and three on occupational skin diseases. Further, eight studies calculated loss of income/compensation payments. Out of the 16 identified articles, only two reported costs directly attributable to isocyanate-induced diseases (asthma). Studies were hardly comparable because they differed substantially in their methodological approaches. Moreover, the quality assessment of the studies revealed substantial limitations. While a wide range of isocyanate-related costs was identified, consequences of isocyanate-related occupational diseases were considerable in terms of societal costs and loss of income. In most studies, indirect costs were the main cost driver. There is a need for high-quality cost of illness studies on isocyanate-induced diseases stratified by degree of severity and sex. Such studies provide valuable information to develop preventive strategies and set priorities for measures to lower the burden of professional health risks.

A risk adjustment approach to estimating the burden of skin disease in the United States.

Direct insurance claims tabulation and risk adjustment statistical methods can be used to estimate health care costs associated with various diseases. In this third manuscript derived from the new national Burden of Skin Disease Report from the American Academy of Dermatology, a risk adjustment method that was based on modeling the average annual costs of individuals with or without specific diseases, and specifically tailored for 24 skin disease categories, was used to estimate the economic burden of skin disease. The results were compared with the claims tabulation method used in the first 2 parts of this project. The risk adjustment method estimated the direct health care costs of skin diseases to be $46 billion in 2013, approximately $15 billion less than estimates using claims tabulation. For individual skin diseases, the risk adjustment cost estimates ranged from 11% to 297% of those obtained using claims tabulation for the 10 most costly skin disease categories. Although either method may be used for purposes of estimating the costs of skin disease, the choice of method will affect the end result. These findings serve as an important reference for future discussions about the method chosen in health care payment models to estimate both the cost of skin disease and the potential cost impact of care changes.

Hospital readmissions among patients with skin disease: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions represent a potential target for reducing unnecessary health care expenditures; however, readmissions following dermatology hospitalizations remain poorly characterized. OBJECTIVE: To assess the frequency and demographics of readmissions for skin disease. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of dermatology hospitalizations by using the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database. RESULTS: Readmissions following dermatologic hospitalizations cost the American health care system $1.05 billion in 2014. The 30-day rate of all-cause readmission following the 647,251 weighted index admissions for skin disease was 12.63%. Readmission was most common following hospitalizations for cutaneous lymphomas (39.63%), connective tissue disorders (26.28%), and cutaneous congenital abnormalities (23.86%). Predictors of readmission included public insurance with Medicaid (odds ratio [OR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-1.70) or Medicare (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.48-1.62), residence in a low-income community (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.09-1.20), an increased number of chronic conditions (OR, 4.46; 95% CI, 4.15-4.79), and a large hospital (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16). Urban (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.94) and rural (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.73-0.82) nonteaching hospitals were protective against readmissions from skin disease. LIMITATIONS: We were unable to assess the impact of inpatient dermatology consultations on hospital readmission rates. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant health care and demographic disparities in readmissions for skin disease.

A National Survey of Medical Coding and Billing Training in United States Dermatology Residency Programs.

BACKGROUND: Due to frequent changes in medical coding systems, billing for outpatient visits through Evaluation and Management (E & M) services has become increasingly complicated. As a result, physicians often bill improperly, costing the United States health care system billions of dollars annually. Despite the importance of proper documentation, medical coding and billing is largely ignored during residency training. OBJECTIVE: Assess the exposure to and quality of medical coding and billing training in dermatology residency programs. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to dermatology programs in the United States consisting of questions pertaining to didactic education for, experience with, and resident knowledge of medical coding and billing. RESULTS: 138/443 dermatology residents participated (31.2% response rate). 79% of residents reported receiving some type of formal training. Nearly 89% reported personally billing patient visits to some degree, with 41.3% billing for 100% of outpatient visits. Over 75% of residents were able to answer basic billing questions and 70% correctly billed a patient visit when given a complex clinical scenario. Despite these results, only 37% of residents reported feeling confident in their billing abilities. Lastly, 94.9% of respondents believed medical coding and billing should be integrated into dermatology training curriculums. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of dermatology residents have opportunities to learn medical coding and billing through didactics and clinical experiences. Many residents were able to answer correctly questions that tested their basic knowledge of E&M coding. These results are encouraging and reflect the recognition of the importance of medical coding and billing training during residency. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(6):678-682.

Inpatient burden of pediatric dermatology in the United States.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: It is known that inpatient care accounts for a significant portion of health care expenditures, but the national burden of inpatient pediatric dermatology is poorly characterized. We sought to assess risk factors, conditions, and financial costs associated with pediatric hospitalizations for skin disease. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of pediatric dermatology hospitalizations using the 2012 Kids' Inpatient Database, which samples 80% of non-birth-related pediatric admissions from 44 states to generate national estimates. The demographic characteristics of children admitted for dermatologic and nondermatologic conditions were compared, and the financial costs of these admissions were analyzed. RESULTS: In 2012, there were 74 229 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 68 620-79 978) pediatric dermatology hospitalizations, accounting for 4.2% of all pediatric admissions and $379.8 million (95% CI = $341.3-418.4 million) in health care costs. Bacterial infections (n = 59 115, 95% CI = 54 669-63 561), viral diseases (n = 3812, 95% CI = 3457-4167), and noncancerous skin growths (n = 2931, 95% CI = 2318-3545) were the most common conditions requiring hospitalization. The highest mean cost per hospitalization was for admissions for cutaneous lymphomas ($58 294, 95% CI = $31 694-84 893), congenital skin abnormalities ($24 186, 95% CI = $16 645-31 728), and ulcers ($17 064, 95% CI = $14 683-19 446). Pediatric dermatology hospitalizations were most strongly associated with living in a low-income community (odds ratio (OR) = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.16-1.29) and the South (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.19-1.46) and being uninsured (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.26-1.45) or having Medicaid insurance (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.13-1.22). CONCLUSION: Skin disease is a common cause of hospitalizations in children, and there are disparities in these admissions that could reflect inadequate access to outpatient pediatric dermatologists.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Determining Variances in Ostomy Skin Conditions and the Economic Impact (ADVOCATE Trial).

PURPOSE: To compare ostomy-related costs and incidence of peristomal skin complications (PSCs) for ceramide-infused ostomy skin barriers and control skin barriers. DESIGN: The ADVOCATE trial is a multi-centered randomized controlled trial, and double-blinded international study with an adaptive design. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 153 adults from 25 sites from the United States, Canada, and Europe. Participants were seen in hospital and outpatient care settings. METHODS: Data were collected by investigators at each site during face-to-face visits and during telephone check-in calls between visits. Cost of care data were collected using a questionnaire developed specifically for the study. The peristomal skin was assessed using the Ostomy Skin Tool. Health-related quality of life was measured using the SF-12v2. Patient-reported outcomes were collected using a patient-centered study-specific questionnaire. Cost of care was analyzed via analysis of covariance comparing total cost of care for 12 weeks between the 2 groups. The incidence of PSC was analyzed via Barnard's exact test comparing the incidence of PSCs between the control and treatment groups. Tertiary outcomes were exploratory in nature and not statistically powered. RESULTS: Use of the ceramide-infused barrier significantly reduced stoma-related cost of care over a 12-week period, resulting in a $36.46 decrease in cost (14% relative decrease). The adjusted average costs were $223.73 in the treatment group and $260.19 in the control group (P = .017). The overall incidence of PSCs in the study was 47.7%; PSC incidence was 40.5% for the treatment group versus 55.4% for controls (P = .069, 95% confidence interval of the difference: -1.2 to 30.4). Significantly more participants using the ceramide-infused skin barrier were "very satisfied" with barrier performance (75% vs 55%; P = .033), prevention of leakage (63% vs 38%; P < .01), and prevention of itching (53% vs 31%; P = .016). General postoperative improvement in health-related quality of life was noted in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a ceramide-infused barrier significantly decreased cost and increased satisfaction with patient-reported outcomes.

Contribution of health care factors to the burden of skin disease in the United States.

The American Academy of Dermatology has developed an up-to-date national Burden of Skin Disease Report on the impact of skin disease on patients and on the US population. In this second of 3 manuscripts, data are presented on specific health care dimensions that contribute to the overall burden of skin disease. Through the use of data derived from medical claims in 2013 for 24 skin disease categories, these results indicate that skin disease health care is delivered most frequently to the aging US population, who are afflicted with more skin diseases than other age groups. Furthermore, the overall cost of skin disease is highest within the commercially insured population, and skin disease treatment primarily occurs in the outpatient setting. Dermatologists provided approximately 30% of office visit care and performed nearly 50% of cutaneous surgeries. These findings serve as a critical foundation for future discussions on the clinical importance of skin disease and the value of dermatologic care across the population.

Understanding the cost of dermatologic care: A survey study of dermatology providers, residents, and patients.

BACKGROUND: The American Academy of Dermatology recommends dermatologists understand the costs of dermatologic care. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to measure dermatology providers' understanding of the cost of dermatologic care and how those costs are communicated to patients. We also aimed to understand the perspectives of patients and dermatological trainees on how cost information enters into the care they receive or provide. METHODS: Surveys were systematically developed and distributed to 3 study populations: dermatology providers, residents, and patients. RESULTS: Response rates were over 95% in all 3 populations. Dermatology providers and residents consistently underestimated the costs of commonly recommended dermatologic medications but accurately predicted the cost of common dermatologic procedures. Dermatology patients preferred to know the cost of procedures and medications, even when covered by insurance. In this population, the costs of dermatologic medications frequently interfered with patients' ability to properly adhere to prescribed regimens. LIMITATIONS: The surveyed population was limited to the northwestern United States and findings may not be generalizable. Cost estimations were based on average reimbursement rates, which vary by insurer. CONCLUSION: Improving dermatology providers' awareness and communication of the costs of dermatologic care might enhance medical decision-making, improve adherence and outcomes, and potentially reduce overall health care expenditures.

The burden of skin disease in the United States.

Since the publication of the last US national burden of skin disease report in 2006, there have been substantial changes in the practice of dermatology and the US health care system. These include the development of new treatment modalities, marked increases in the cost of medications, increasingly complex payer rules and regulations, and an aging of the US population. Recognizing the need for up-to-date data to inform researchers, policy makers, public stakeholders, and health care providers about the impact of skin disease on patients and US society, the American Academy of Dermatology produced a new national burden of skin disease report. Using 2013 claims data from private and governmental insurance providers, this report analyzed the prevalence, cost, and mortality attributable to 24 skin disease categories in the US population. In this first of 3 articles, the presented data demonstrate that nearly 85 million Americans were seen by a physician for at least 1 skin disease in 2013. This led to an estimated direct health care cost of $75 billion and an indirect lost opportunity cost of $11 billion. Further, mortality was noted in half of the 24 skin disease categories.