How to do digital Advice and Guidance well.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated a rapid expansion of digital Advice and Guidance (A&G) across UK medical and surgical specialties. Dermatology A&G requests have increased by over 400% since the onset of the pandemic in 2020, with rapid expansion of teledermatology A&G services across England. Dermatology A&G is usually carried out asynchronously through dedicated digital platforms such as the National Health Service e-referral service, with streamlined conversion to referral if clinically indicated. A&G with images is advocated as the main referral pathway to dermatology specialist services in England (excluding the 2-week wait suspected skin cancer pathway). Providing dermatological care through A&G requires specific clinical skill sets to ensure rapid, safe and collaborative delivery, and optimization of educational benefit. Little published guidance is available to signpost clinicians to what constitutes a high-quality A&G request and response. This educational article discusses good clinical practice based on extensive local and national experience from primary and secondary care doctors. We cover digital communication skills, shared decision making, clinical competency and building collaborative links between patients, referrers and specialists. High-quality A&G, with agreed turn-around times and optimization of technology, can significantly streamline patient care and strengthen links between clinicians, providing it is appropriately resourced within the wider planning of elective care and outpatient activity.

Pilot parallel randomised controlled trial of protective socks against usual care to reduce skin tears in high risk people: 'STOPCUTS'.

BACKGROUND: Skin tears are common in older adults and those taking steroids and warfarin. They are traumatic, often blunt injuries caused by oblique knocks to the extremities. The epidermis may separate from the dermis or both layers from underlying tissues leaving a skin flap or total loss of tissue, which is painful and prone to infection. 'Dermatuff™' knee-length socks containing Kevlar fibres (used in stab-proof vests and motorcyclists' clothing) aim to prevent skin tears. The acceptability of the socks and the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) had not been explored. METHODS: In this pilot parallel group RCT, 90 people at risk of skin-tear injury from Devon care homes and primary care were randomised to receive the socks or treatment as usual (TAU). The pilot aimed to estimate parameters to inform the design of a substantive trial and record professionals' views and participants' acceptability of the intervention and of study participation. RESULTS: Participants were randomised from July 2013 and followed up until February 2015. Community participants were easier to recruit than care homes residents but were 10 years younger on average and more active. To recruit 90 participants, 395 had to be approached overall as 77% were excluded or declined. Seventy-nine participants (88%) completed the trial and 27/44 (61%) wore the socks for 16 weeks. There were 31 skin tear injuries affecting 18 (20%) of the 90 participants. The TAU group received more injuries, more repeated episodes, and larger tears with greater severity. Common daily diary reasons for not wearing the socks included perceived warmth in hot weather or not being available (holiday, in hospital, bed rest). Resource use data were obtainable and indicated that sock wearing gave a reduction in treatment costs whilst well-completed questionnaires showed improvements in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial has successfully informed the design and conduct of a future definitive cost-effectiveness RCT. It would need to be conducted in primary care with 880 active at-risk, elderly patients (440 per arm). Skin tear incidence and quality of life (from EQ5D5L) over a 4-month period would be the primary and secondary outcomes respectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN96565376.

Pilot randomised controlled trial of protective socks against usual care to reduce skin tears in high risk people "STOPCUTS": study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Skin tears are traumatic injuries occurring mostly on the extremities due to shearing and friction forces that separate the epidermis and the dermis from underlying tissues. They are common and occur mostly in older adults and those taking medications that compromise skin integrity. Pretibial skin tears can develop into leg ulcers, which require lengthy, expensive treatment to heal. Traumatic injuries are the second most common type of wounds after pressure ulcers in care homes and are the commonest reason for older adults to require the attention of a community nurse. Common causes of skin tear injuries are bumping into furniture and other obstacles, using mobility aids, transfer to/from wheelchairs, getting in and out of bed and falls. No effective preventative measures currently exist but knee-length, protective socks are now available that contain impact-resistant Kevlar fibres (of the type used in stab-proof vests) and cushioning layers underneath. METHODS/DESIGN: In this pilot parallel group, randomised controlled trial, 90 people at risk of skin-tear injury will be randomised with equal allocation to receive the intervention or usual care. They will be recruited from care homes and from the community via general practices and a research volunteer database. Pilot outcomes include recruitment, eligibility, attrition, ascertainment of injuries and completion of outcome measures. Acceptability of the intervention and of study participation will be explored using semi-structured interviews. The proposed primary outcome for the future definitive trial is skin tear-free days. Secondary outcomes are skin tear severity, health status, specific skin-tears quality of life, capability and fear of falling, measured at baseline and the end of the study and in the event of a skin tear. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will be used to inform the development and design of a future randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a unique and innovative approach to skin tear prevention. Approval was granted by the NRES - Cornwall and Plymouth Research Ethics Committee (13/SW/013). Dissemination will include publication of quantitative and qualitative findings, and experience of public involvement in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN96565376.

Towards global consensus on outcome measures for atopic eczema research: results of the HOME II meeting.

The use of nonstandardized and inadequately validated outcome measures in atopic eczema trials is a major obstacle to practising evidence-based dermatology. The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative is an international multiprofessional group dedicated to atopic eczema outcomes research. In June 2011, the HOME initiative conducted a consensus study involving 43 individuals from 10 countries, representing different stakeholders (patients, clinicians, methodologists, pharmaceutical industry) to determine core outcome domains for atopic eczema trials, to define quality criteria for atopic eczema outcome measures and to prioritize topics for atopic eczema outcomes research. Delegates were given evidence-based information, followed by structured group discussion and anonymous consensus voting. Consensus was achieved to include clinical signs, symptoms, long-term control of flares and quality of life into the core set of outcome domains for atopic eczema trials. The HOME initiative strongly recommends including and reporting these core outcome domains as primary or secondary endpoints in all future atopic eczema trials. Measures of these core outcome domains need to be valid, sensitive to change and feasible. Prioritized topics of the HOME initiative are the identification/development of the most appropriate instruments for the four core outcome domains. HOME is open to anyone with an interest in atopic eczema outcomes research.

Pyoderma gangrenosum in association with autoimmune neutropenia of infancy.

We report the case of a 10-month-old girl who presented with a spontaneous ulcer on the left buttock which failed to heal despite antibiotic therapy. Histology showed changes consistent with pyoderma gangrenosum and the ulcer resolved rapidly with super-potent topical steroids under occlusion. Blood tests revealed a persistent neutropenia. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antineutrophil antibodies were detected in the serum, directed against human neutrophil antigen (HNA)-1a. Bone marrow studies showed normocellular marrow with no evidence of dysplasia. T and B cell subsets and karyotype analysis were normal. Autoimmune neutropenia is an uncommon self-limiting condition in young children. Pyoderma gangrenosum is rare in infants, although the buttocks are a common site of involvement in this age group. Pyoderma gangrenosum in infancy can be associated with systemic disease as in adults, particularly myelodysplasia and leukemia, arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. However, the association of pyoderma gangrenosum and autoimmune neutropenia of infancy has not previously been reported.

Measuring atopic eczema severity visually: which variables are most important to patients?

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in the objective visual variables used to measure atopic eczema severity in clinical trials, making comparison and interpretation of results difficult. OBJECTIVE: To provide a rationale for simplifying and standardizing objective atopic eczema scoring by investigating which visual variables provide the best measure of disease severity from the patient's perspective. SETTING: The dermatology outpatient department at the Queen's Medical Centre, University Hospital in Nottingham, and 5 local general practices. PATIENTS: One hundred eighty individuals with atopic eczema. INTERVENTIONS: Clinical examination with scoring of 7 clinical signs and disease extent, followed by regression analyses of visual variable scores against a patient-rated measure of current disease severity. RESULTS: Objective measurements account for only a quarter of the variation in patient-rated disease severity. Three clinical signs were independent predictors of patient-rated disease severity: excoriations, erythema, and edema/papulation. Disease extent measurements do not reflect patient-rated disease severity in a linear manner, with mean severity scores increasing little above 30% body surface area involvement. CONCLUSIONS: From the patient's perspective, the measurement of 3 clinical signs-excoriations, erythema, and edema/papulation-provides as much information about current atopic eczema severity as more complex scoring systems that measure multiple clinical signs and disease extent. The simplicity of the Three Item Severity score, a previously published atopic eczema score based on measurement of these 3 clinical signs, makes it a suitable tool for research studies or clinical practice.

The patient-oriented eczema measure: development and initial validation of a new tool for measuring atopic eczema severity from the patients' perspective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a simple, valid, repeatable, and readily understandable patient-oriented assessment measure for monitoring disease activity in children and adults with atopic eczema. DESIGN: Qualitative semistructured patient interviews identified a list of symptoms of atopic eczema. These symptoms were quantitatively analyzed in a larger patient population to identify which symptoms were important to patients and amenable to monitoring as part of a scoring system. SETTING: The outpatient Department of Dermatology at the Queen's Medical Centre, University Hospital, Nottingham, England, and 5 local general practices. PATIENTS: Four hundred thirty-five patients with atopic eczema. RESULTS: Seven symptoms were incorporated into the final patient-oriented eczema measure using a simple 5-point scale of frequency of occurrence during the previous week, with a maximum total score of 28. Validity testing against the Dermatology Life Quality Index, Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index, and patients' global severity assessments showed good correlation (r = 0.78, r = 0.73, and r = 0.81, respectively; P<.001). Internal consistency was high (Cronbach alpha = 0.88), and test-retest reliability was good, with 95% of scores falling within 2.6 points on repeat testing (mean score difference, 0.04; SD, 1.32). Individual variables in the measure demonstrated sensitivity to change during a 4-week in-clinic period and an 18-week randomized controlled clinical trial. CONCLUSION: The patient-oriented eczema measure is a practical self-assessed measurement tool for monitoring aspects of atopic eczema that are important to patients in routine clinical practice or in the clinical trial setting.

Measuring atopic dermatitis severity in randomized controlled clinical trials: what exactly are we measuring?

Well-designed clinical trials are a fundamental aspect of evidence-based medicine. Such trials are dependent on the use of valid, reliable, and relevant outcome measures. Wide variation in outcome methodology can have important detrimental effects on the correct interpretation and comparison of results. The objective of this study was to describe the variation in outcome methodology in randomized controlled trials of therapeutic interventions for atopic dermatitis published between January 1994 and December 2001. Of the 93 eligible randomized controlled trials identified using a systematic electronic database search strategy, 85 (91%) incorporated an objective measurement of clinical signs. Only 23 (27%) of these trials used a published severity scale, however. The remainder used either modified versions of published scales (14%) or unnamed scales with no data on validity or reliability (59%), although unpublished scales were used significantly less frequently over the last 2 y compared to previously (21%vs 74%, p<0.01). There was lack of consensus on which clinical features best reflect disease severity, with 31 different descriptions of clinical signs being used across all scoring systems. Fifty-six different "objective" clinical scales were identified. Patient symptoms were recorded in 80 trials (86%) and disease extent in 62 trials (67%). Quality of life was measured in only three trials (3%). This wide variation in outcome methodology is hindering evidence-based practice, and the widespread use of unvalidated outcome measures is a potential source of bias and inaccuracy. More emphasis should be placed on measuring things that are important to patients such as symptoms and quality of life.