Interventions to Reduce Skin-related Self-stigma: A Systematic Review.

Self-stigma beliefs are common among people with visible chronic skin diseases and can negatively affect their quality of life and psychosocial wellbeing. Hence, evidence-based interventions are urgently needed. The objective for this systematic review was to summarize research on available interventions and evaluate their benefits and limitations. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted an electronic database search of four databases (EMBASE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science). Studies were eligible if they (a) investigated interventions to reduce self-stigma in adults with chronic skin disease, (b) were original empirical articles, and (c) were written in English or German. Two independent reviewers conducted the abstract and full text screening as well as data extraction. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklists. The initial search yielded 5811 abstracts; of which, 23 records were eligible. Studies addressed a broad range of skin conditions, and interventions ranged from social skills training, counselling and self-help to psychosocial and behavioural interventions. Overall, interventions had mostly positive effects on self-stigma and related constructs. However, the study quality was heterogeneous, and further efforts to develop, thoroughly evaluate and implement interventions tackling self-stigma in multiple skin conditions and languages are warranted.

Predictors and mechanisms of self-stigma in five chronic skin diseases: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with skin disease suffer due to disease-related physical symptoms, as well as due to significant psychosocial burden. A major contributor of this burden is the experience of stigmatization. Research indicates that people with visible skin diseases deal with both social stigma and self-stigma. OBJECTIVE: This systematic literature review aimed to aggregate existing research on correlates and mechanisms that contribute to self-stigmatization among people with atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, vitiligo, alopecia areata or hidradenitis suppurativa and to, ultimately, identify targets for psychosocial interventions. METHODS: The review followed PRISMA guidelines. Four databases, PubMed, OVID, Web of Science and PsycINFO were searched for peer-reviewed articles. Studies were identified by two independent researchers and were eligible if they (1) assessed adults with one of five chronic skin diseases-atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, vitiligo, alopecia areata or hidradenitis suppurativa, (2) measured self-stigma or relevant synonyms, (3) evaluated psychosocial correlates, predictors or explanatory mechanisms of self-stigma and (4) were published in German or English in a peer-reviewed journal. The Johanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies was used to evaluate the quality of studies. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies were included with a mean quality rating of 7.04 (out of 8). Social stigma, coping strategies (such as lack of acceptance) and lack of social support were identified as main predictors of self-stigma. Although study quality was good, all but one study had a cross-sectional design that does not allow examining causal relationships among the determinants of self-stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from the present review revealed several psychosocial variables that are malleable and potentially suitable as intervention targets. Those variables such as acceptance should be targeted in evidence-based interventions specifically developed to reduce self-stigma to, ultimately, improve mental health of people affected.

Out-of-Pocket Costs in Alopecia Areata: A Cross-Sectional Study in German-speaking Countries.

Alopecia areata is a common skin disease which is associated with psychosocial and financial burden. No curative therapy exists and, hence, affected persons resort to self-financed cosmetic solutions. However, studies on the economic impact of alopecia areata on individuals are limited. To estimate annual individual out-of-pocket costs in persons with alopecia areata, a cross-sectional study using a standardized online questionnaire was performed in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. A total of 346 individuals (95.1% women, mean age: 38.5 ± 11.6 years) with alopecia areata participated between April and August 2020. Mean additional spending on everyday necessities was 1,248€ per person per year, which was significantly influenced by the duration of the illness, the treatment provider, and disease severity. Hair replacement products and cosmetics accounted for the highest monthly costs, followed by costs for physician visits, hospital treatments, and medication. Most participants (n = 255, 73.7%) were currently not undergoing treatment, due to lack of efficacy, side-effects, costs and acceptance of the disease. Sex differences in expenses were observed, with women having higher expenditures. Alopecia areata-related out-of-pocket costs place a considerable financial burden on affected individuals, are higher compared with those of other chronic diseases, and should be considered in economic assessments of the impact of this disease.

Everybody Copes: An Interprofessional Workshop on Stress, Coping, and Helping Primary Care Patients Manage Medical Stressors.

Introduction: The value of psychological principles has become apparent in medical settings, especially with the rise of patient-centered care. We aimed to provide a curriculum informing medical providers about the theoretical basis and clinical utility of the social-cognitive model of stress and coping. Methods: This workshop was delivered to an interprofessional team of faculty and trainees. Our initial pedagogical approach was to relate the concepts of cognitive appraisals and coping strategies to participants' own stress responses. We then used didactic presentation and small-group activities to explore ways to promote adaptive coping with patients to improve health outcomes. Learners participated in a mindfulness exercise, conceptualized coping strategies given a hypothetical case scenario, and, in small groups, role-played a patient encounter to construct an effective coping repertoire for the patient. Participants completed a prework self-assessment and workshop evaluation form. Results: The 2.5-hour workshop had 48 participants from five professions (medicine, education, physician assistant, pharmacology, psychology). We received 35 evaluations (73% response rate). Learners reported increased real-world skills (M = 8.0 out of 10) and feeling better prepared for working in interprofessional settings (M = 7.6 out of 10). Qualitative feedback suggested that participants recognized the importance of individual differences in coping with stress and felt they could categorize strategies into emotion- or problem-focused coping. Discussion: This workshop provided participants with basic knowledge about the social-cognitive model of stress and coping and allowed them to practice newly learned skills in a role-play as an interprofessional medical care team.