Assessing the Ability of Non-dermatology Physicians to Recognize Urgent Skin Diseases.

Introduction Many patients present to the emergency department with skin conditions that are not true dermatologic emergencies. Urgent skin conditions are uncommon. Because these conditions are rare, they can be sometimes challenging to diagnose. Few works of literature discussed the accuracy of non-dermatologists' initial judgment on dermatologic conditions concluding that non-dermatologists misdiagnose many common and uncommon skin conditions. Because the study was never done in our region, we aim to conduct an online assessment using a questionnaire assessing the ability of non-dermatologists to recognize urgent skin diseases at King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted. Non-dermatologist physicians were contacted through their verified emails, provided by the secretaries of each department and the academic affairs unit. The questionnaire consisted of two main sections, the first section covered demographics, specialty, and academic level. The second part had eight questions, each containing a brief case scenario about an urgent dermatological condition with a picture of the condition attached. Participants were required to answer the questions and assess on a scale from one to 10 how confident they were about their answers. The responses were collected and analyzed. Results Out of all 161 responses, this study included 93 male physicians (57.8%) and 68 female physicians (42.2%). The mean age in the study was approximately 45 ± 3 years. This study showed that the percentage of accuracy by non-dermatologists in diagnosing urgent skin diseases given the typical presentation of the condition was (61.33%); nevertheless, the percentage decreased when it was recalculated in relation to the full level of confidence to (25.3%). Herpes zoster appeared to be the most recognizable urgent skin disease, and Pemphigus vulgaris was the least recognizable one. Conclusion This study shows that it is difficult for physicians to recognize some urgent skin diseases, which affects offering the optimum health care for the patients. Moreover, more dermatology-focused courses are needed to strengthen the knowledge about dermatological diseases.

The Risk of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients.

Background This study aimed to assess the risk of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in glaucoma patients using the STOP-BANG questionnaire at the King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia. Methodology This study used a cross-sectional telephone survey. Patients older than 18 years diagnosed with open-angle glaucoma, without a diagnosis of respiratory disease or steroid use, completed the STOP-BANG questionnaire, a validated tool to determine the risk for developing OSA. Patients with a score of 3 or more were considered at intermediate risk of OSA, and those with a score of 5 or more of the maximum 8 points were considered to have a high risk for moderate/severe OSA. Social demographic information and medical histories were collected from all patients using the medical record system of the KAUH. Results A total of 77 patients with glaucoma were included in the study. The mean STOP-BANG score was 3.40 ± 1.5; 27.3% of the patients had low risk of OSA, 36.4% had intermediate risk, and 36.4% had high risk. An evaluation of the OSA symptoms found snoring, tiredness, and observed apnea in 29.9%, 36.4%, and 14.3% of patients, respectively. The association between body mass index and STOP-BANG score was significant. Conclusions Our analysis and assessment of the association between glaucoma and OSA found no evidence that glaucoma patients are more likely to have OSA or develop more severe OSA than others. Therefore, we do not recommend systematic screening of glaucoma patients for OSA.

Saudi practical guidelines on biologic treatment of psoriasis.

The current treatment of psoriasis patients with biologic agents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is mainly based on clinical experience. Although there are published international guidelines for treatment with biologics, such as the European S3 guidelines (a joint project of the European Dermatology Forum, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, and the International Psoriasis Council), many nations have found it beneficial to develop country-based guidelines that incorporate specific regional aspects of therapy (legal and practical). With the expanded role of biologic agents in the treatment of psoriasis in Saudi Arabia, a need for local Saudi guidelines has become evident. Here we present a practical approach to the evidence-based clinical administration of biologics for professionals who treat patients with psoriasis.