Medical consultation the year before melanoma diagnosis: could we detect melanoma earlier?

Melanoma Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes: A Feasibility Study of Melanoma Screening Implementation in Primary Care Settings

Introduction

Melanoma incidence rates are rising faster than the rates of any other malignancy. As a major global public health concern, melanoma can be identified by a visual exam not requiring expensive invasive procedures. However, non-dermatologists lack specialized training and skills to identify high-risk patients and implement melanoma skin screenings during regular exams. Most patients from rural and underserved areas have inadequate access to specialty dermatologic care, which can potentially lead to later-stage melanomas and poor patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to the implementation of risk surveys and melanoma skin screenings in primary care settings through live interactive education and the telementoring project - Melanoma ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes). 

Methods

This cross-sectional study was designed with theoretical concepts from dissemination and implementation research. Monthly Melanoma ECHO sessions were integrated into an ongoing Dermatology ECHO at the University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA, from April 2018 to February 2019. Ten primary care providers, medical doctors/doctors of osteopathic medicine (MDs/DOs), nurse practitioners (NPs), and physician assistants (PAs), from across Missouri participated. Eleven virtual monthly melanoma-related didactics and case-based discussions were provided to participants. Information regarding risk factors, risk surveys, and screening techniques was provided. Ongoing telementoring and guidance were also provided for de-identified real-life patient cases. The main outcomes and measures of the study were to identify the facilitators and barriers of risk survey and melanoma skin screenings in primary care settings and to quantify the number of high-risk patients identified by participating providers and the number of new melanomas detected by visual exams during the study period.

Results

The primary reason why six out of 10 providers reported participation in Melanoma ECHO was that implementing melanoma skin screenings in their practice was made easier as it increased their confidence. Nine providers reported increased knowledge, and eight cited professional networking as other facilitators. The main perceived barrier to melanoma skin screening was lack of administrative and nursing support, and six providers indicated that lack of time to incorporate skin exams was also a barrier. Combined, ten participants reported identifying 976 high-risk patients during the study period and detecting 36 new melanomas.

Discussion and conclusion

Our findings indicate that primary care providers may benefit from attending regularly scheduled and focused specialized telementoring sessions, such as Melanoma ECHO. Ongoing support from specialists may help providers practicing in rural and isolated areas with the successful integration of risk surveys and melanoma skin screenings in primary care settings. Further Melanoma ECHO sessions with a more diverse group of primary care providers are needed to better understand the generalizability of the results.

Five-point checklist for skin cancer detection in primary care

BACKGROUND

Skin cancer screening interventions often relay on the involvement of general practitioners (GPs). Many interventions up to now have been directed to training approaches focusing on the clinical features of skin malignancies to increase GPs skill in skin cancer recognition.

METHODS

Based on the available current knowledge about skin cancer epidemiology and risk factors, we built up a 5-point checklist to help GPs in triaging patients to be referred to a dermatologist.

RESULTS

Five-point check-list: 1) visible sun damaged skin on exposed areas (red and brown to black macules and crusts on visible skin); 2) more than 20 nevi on the arms; 3) one or more ABCD positive lesions (flat, large and asymmetric macules); 4) one or more EFG positive lesions (elevated, firm and growing skin lesions); 5) a pigmented lesion larger than 1.5 cm in diameter.

CONCLUSIONS

Our aim was to provide a short list of practical rules, easy to adopt into a routine practice, in order to achieve a more effective triage of patients requiring a dermatology consultation for skin cancer examination. The novelty of the proposed method relies on the approach. The proposed method does not require the GP to diagnose skin cancer. The aim is to involve GPs in the selection of patients to be referred to the specialist, in order to reduce the waiting time while avoiding the risk to leave cancers untreated.