A rare case of herpes zoster triggered by a non-live varicella vaccine.

Herpes zoster is caused by reactivation of the latent varicella zoster virus and often occurs in immunocompromised individuals. We describe a rare case of an immunocompetent patient with herpes zoster triggered by Shingrix, a non-live vaccine designed to protect against herpes zoster. Although herpes zoster has been described as a reaction to vaccinations before, to our knowledge this is the first report of herpes zoster triggered by a varicella zoster vaccine.

The dermatology residency application process.

The dermatology application process is grueling, that is tough to navigate without the proper guidance. This commentary is meant to shed light on the factors that can help applicants stand out in order to be successful in the match. It includes observations from successful applicants from the most recent match process.

The Impact of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Teledermatology has been widely adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic as virtual patient care promotes social distancing and decreases viral exposure risk. As teledermatology has become more prominent during this period, it is essential to assess whether virtual visits allow for adequate patient care. To assess perceptions of advantages and disadvantages of teledermatology, a survey was sent to academic dermatologists through the Association of Professors of Dermatology (APD) listserv. Of the physicians surveyed, 94% reported their departments had implemented teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority (64%) described teledermatology as an effective tool for patient care because of improved access to care, decreased risk of COVID-19 exposure, and convenience. Frequently cited limitations of teledermatology were image quality, technical difficulties, and inability to perform a comprehensive skin examination. Thirty-seven percent of respondents reported teledermatology as a contributor to their professional burnout. Although teledermatology has become more prevalent as a result of the pandemic, its role moving forward is uncertain given its limitations.

The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on dermatologist burnout: a survey study.

Burnout in dermatology is on the rise, with 36% of U.S. dermatologists experiencing burnout in 2020. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may exacerbate this problem with healthcare workers reporting increased anxiety, depression, and insomnia. To assess the rate, severity, and causes of burnout before and during the pandemic, a survey was sent to academic dermatologists through the Association of Professors of Dermatology (APD) listserv and compared to a similar survey administered to the same population prior to the pandemic. Burnout rates have increased from 2018, with 53% of participants experiencing burnout once a week or more and 17% experiencing burnout daily during the pandemic. The most common COVID-related burnout factors involve uncertainty about the future, teledermatology, fear of exposing loved ones to COVID-19, and compensation reduction. The challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic compound existing burnout within dermatology, warranting consideration by academic institutions.

Publication rates on the topic of racial and ethnic diversity in dermatology versus other specialties.

BACKGROUND: The population of the U.S. is becoming more diverse every year. The field of dermatology is not following the same trend. OBJECTIVE: To assess the promotion of diversity in the field of dermatology by analyzing publications focused on diversity, compared to other specialties. METHODS: The PubMed database was systematically searched to identify publications focused on diversity from January 2008 to July 2019. The search criteria were as follows: dermatology/radiology/ophthalmology/ anesthesiology/orthopedic surgery/family medicine/ internal medicine/general surgery AND diversity/ diverse/racial/race/ethnic/ethnicity/cultural/culture/competency/competence. Comparisons were made using single-factor ANOVA and two-group t-tests. A qualitative analysis was performed for publications in the field of dermatology. RESULTS: From January 2016 to July 2019, there were 25 publications focused on diversity in dermatology (Mean=6.25, SD=2.06), compared to 6 in radiology (Mean=1.50, SD=1.29, P=0.01), two in ophthalmology (Mean=0.50, SD=0.58, P=0.01), two in anesthesiology (Mean=0.50, SD=1.00, P=0.01), 12 in orthopedic surgery (Mean=3.00, SD=1.41, P=0.04), 23 in family medicine (Mean=5.75, SD=2.22, P=0.75), 9 in internal medicine (Mean=2.25, SD=1.71, P=0.02), and 7 in general surgery (Mean=1.75, SD=0.50, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Although the field of dermatology has suffered from a lack of racial/ethnic diversity, efforts to promote diversity via increased publications in the last four years have been stronger in dermatology compared to many other fields.

The ethical foundation for honesty and the focused use of deception in dermatology.

Physicians have a fiduciary duty to be honest and to act in the patients' best interest. There are times when these two duties conflict. Honesty is paramount in supporting the physician-patient relationship and loss of patient trust is devastating. Furthermore, even minor deception can suggest a return to the physician authoritarianism of the past century that has been decried by modern ethicists. Nonetheless, circumstances can arise in which good judgement may require less than complete honesty to avoid harm to the patient. If the benefit for the patient is large and the risk from deception is small, thoughtful application of minor deception could be designed to benefit patients. Of course, research is required to fully assess this strategy.

A case of gemcitabine-related acute lipodermatosclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Gemcitabine is a chemotherapeutic agent used to treat several solid organ malignancies. The most common cutaneous toxicities are a mild erythematous rash and pruritus, which are often attributed to infectious etiologies. However, certain clinical characteristics may favor a drug-related reaction. Clinicians should recognize these phenomena to avoid potentially unnecessary antibiotic treatment or withdrawal of chemotherapeutic agents. OBJECTIVE: We aim to report a case of gemcitabine-related acute lipodermatosclerosis-like eruption, add to the evolving classification of this condition, and highlight developing literature on gemcitabine that may explain this toxicity. CASE: Dermatology was consulted for presumed cellulitis in a 62-year-old female with pancreatic carcinoma. The patient presented to the emergency department five days after her first dose of gemcitabine with erythema in both lower extremities. A diagnosis of gemcitabine-related acute lipodermatosclerosis was made and the patient was started on topical triamcinolone. CONCLUSION: It is important to recognize gemcitabine-related acute lipodermatosclerosis in order to avoid unnecessary antibiotic use and disruptions in chemotherapy.

Public Perception of Ethical Issues in Dermatology: Evidenced by New York Times Commenters.

BACKGROUND: A 2017 New York Times (NYT) article questioning the appropriateness of skin cancer treatment modality by dermatology providers stimulated discussion among the public pertaining to ethics in the current state of dermatologic practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to characterize issues raised by the comments on the NYT article, discuss strategies to address these concerns, and encourage reflection on ethics in dermatologic care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative analysis was performed on the 309 comments on the NYT article. General themes were identified, resulting in the inclusion of 222 comments. These comments were reviewed and characterized by the type of commenter, his or her stance on health care, and what issues they raised. RESULTS: Providers interested in "profit over patient" was the most common theme, followed by mistrust of APPs, health care system interested in "profit over patient," inadequate supervision by advanced practice providers (APPs), finding the "right" provider, support for coordinated APP and physician care, support for APP credentials, and finally inappropriate elderly care. CONCLUSION: The NYT article raises the concern of identifying quality care and choosing the "right provider"-one who successfully balances the various incentives affecting skin cancer management including appropriate usage of APPs.