General practitioner screening for melanoma: sensitivity, specificity, and effect of training

Assessment of the Diagnostic Performance of Clinical Examinations and High-Frequency Ultrasound in Patients With Pigmented Skin Tumors

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the integration of high-frequency ultrasound (HFUS) to routine clinical examinations could improve diagnostic performance and management decision for pigmented skin tumors.

METHODS

Three general practitioners trained previously and a dermatologist independently assessed pigmented skin tumors and rendered management decision based on clinical examinations alone or clinical examinations integrating HFUS.

RESULTS

After integrating HFUS, the diagnostic area under the curve (AUC) (0.658-0.693 versus 0.848, all P < .05) and specificity (46.6-58.6% versus 89.7%, all P < .05) for pigmented skin malignancies were improved for general practitioners, meanwhile unnecessary biopsy rate reduced (42.9-53.6% versus 10.7%, P < .001). To the dermatologist, the diagnostic AUC (0.822 versus 0.949, P < .001), sensitivity (81.7% versus 96.7%, P = .012) and specificity (0.828 versus 0.931, P = .031) improved significantly, meanwhile both missed biopsy rate (14.5% versus 4.8%, P = .031) and unnecessary biopsy rate (19.6% versus 7.1%, P = .016) decreased. Additionally, the diagnostic performance of the general practitioner with integrating HFUS could be comparable with the dermatologist based on clinical examinations alone (all P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

As a complementary tool of clinical examinations, HFUS could help physicians differentiate pigmented skin malignancies and manage decision.

Synthesis of Existent Oncology Curricula for Primary Care Providers: A Scoping Review With a Global Equity Lens

PURPOSE

Global increases in cancer, coupled with a shortage of cancer specialists, has led to an increasing role for primary care providers (PCP) in cancer care. This review aimed to examine all extant cancer curricula for PCPs and to analyze the motivations for curriculum development.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from inception to October 13, 2021, with no language restrictions. The initial search yielded 11,162 articles and 10,902 articles underwent title and abstract review. After full-text review, 139 articles were included. Numeric and thematic analyses were conducted and education programs were evaluated using Bloom's taxonomy.

RESULTS

Most curricula were developed in high-income countries (HICs), with 58% in the United States. Cancer-specific curricula focused on HIC priority cancers, such as skin/melanoma, and did not represent the global cancer burden. Most (80%) curricula were developed for staff physicians and 73% focused on cancer screening. More than half (57%) of programs were delivered in person, with a shift toward online delivery over time. Less than half (46%) of programs were codeveloped with PCPs and 34% did not involve PCPs in the program design and development. Curricula were primarily developed to improve cancer knowledge, and 72 studies assessed multiple outcome measures. No studies included the top two levels of Bloom's taxonomy of learning (evaluating; creating).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first review to assess the current state of cancer curricula for PCPs with a global focus. This review shows that extant curricula are primarily developed in HICs, do not represent the global cancer burden, and focus on cancer screening. This review lays a foundation to advance the cocreation of curricula that are aligned to the global cancer burden.

Melanoma Detection by Non-Specialists: An Untapped Potential for Triage?

INTRODUCTION

The incidence of melanoma increased considerably in recent decades, representing a significant public health problem. We aimed to evaluate the ability of non-specialists for the preliminary screening of skin lesions to identify melanoma-suspect lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A medical student and a dermatologist specialist examined the total body scans of 50 patients.

RESULTS

The agreement between the expert and the non-specialist was 87.75% (κ = 0.65) regarding the assessment of clinical significance. The four parameters of the ABCD rule were evaluated on the 129 lesions rated as clinically significant by both observers. Asymmetry was evaluated similarly in 79.9% (κ = 0.59), irregular borders in 74.4% (κ = 0.50), color in 81.4% (κ = 0.57), and diameter in 89.9% (κ = 0.77) of the cases. The concordance of the two groups was 96.9% (κ = 0.83) in the case of the detection of the Ugly Duckling Sign.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the involvement of GPs is part of routine care worldwide, emphasizing the importance of educating medical students and general practitioners is crucial, as many European countries lack structured melanoma screening training programs targeting non-dermatologists.

Skin Cancer Education Interventions for Primary Care Providers: A Scoping Review

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are often the first line of defense against skin cancers. Despite this, many PCPs do not receive a comprehensive training in skin conditions. Educational interventions aimed at skin cancer screening instruction for PCPs offer an opportunity to detect skin cancer at earlier stages and subsequent improved morbidity and mortality. A scoping review was conducted to collect data about previously reported skin cancer screening interventions for PCPs. A structured literature search found 51 studies describing 37 unique educational interventions. Curriculum elements utilized by the interventions were divided into categories that would facilitate comparison including curriculum components, delivery format, delivery timing, and outcome measures. The interventions varied widely in design, including literature-based interventions, live teaching sessions, and online courses with durations ranging from 5 min to 24 months. While several interventions demonstrated improvements in skin cancer knowledge and competency by written exams, only a few revealed positive clinical practice changes by biopsy review or referral analysis. Examining successful interventions could aid in developing a skin cancer detection curriculum for PCPs that can produce positive clinical practice and population-based changes in the management of skin cancer.

Virtual lesion clinic - Evaluation of a teledermatology triage system for referrals for suspected melanoma

INTRODUCTION

The Virtual Lesion Clinic (VLC) of Waitematā District Health Board (WDHB) improves melanoma assessment and treatment using teledermatology. The VLC is reserved for pigmented lesions referred as suspected melanoma from primary care but indeterminate at the initial triage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of the VLC diagnosis of melanoma.

METHODS

A retrospective audit of suspected melanoma referrals (1 January 2012 to 31 December 2016) was conducted. Lesions were referred to the VLC if diagnostic uncertainty remained at the initial triage. VLC patients attended MoleMap imaging centres, a dermatologist reviewed history and images remotely and suggested a diagnosis and management plan. Post VLC provisional diagnosis of melanoma, all lesions subsequently excised were reviewed. A positive predictive value (PPV) was calculated using concordance between VLC diagnosis of melanoma and histopathological diagnosis of melanoma. Number needed to excise (NNE) for melanoma was derived, as well as an invasive to in-situ melanoma ratio (IM:MIS) and false negative rate (FNR).

RESULTS

The VLC received 1874 referrals for 3546 lesions during the 5-year study period. Six hundred and seventy-nine lesions were recommended excision/biopsy or specialist face-to-face assessment, and 504 lesions were subsequently excised. The PPV was 62%, NNE 1.62 and IM:MIS 0.76 for lesions suspected to be melanoma at VLC assessment. The VLC had a melanoma-specific FNR of 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The VLC is effective in early diagnosis of melanoma with a high positive predictive value, low number needed to excise and low false negative rate amongst lesions referred as suspected melanoma.

Early detection of melanoma in specialised primary care practice in Australia

BACKGROUND

Primary care skin cancer clinics facilitate early treatment of melanoma in Australia. We investigated the clinical and histopathological features of melanomas diagnosed and treated in an established clinic in Brisbane.

METHODS

Retrospective audit of medical records of patients diagnosed with in situ or invasive primary cutaneous melanoma in a primary care clinic specializing in skin cancer, 2000-2017. Demographic and clinical data were standardly extracted by a medically-trained investigator. We used descriptive analyses to assess characteristics of patients and melanomas, and examine surgical management according to tumour thickness.

RESULTS

Of 380 patients (median age 57 years; 57 % male) newly diagnosed with 497 histologically-confirmed primary cutaneous melanomas, 369 were in situ and 128 invasive. Of the 369 in situ melanomas, 143 (39 %) were on the trunk and 87 (24 %) on the head and neck; 247 (67 %) were diagnosed by shave biopsy; and 141 (38 %) referred for wide local excision (WLE). Of the 128 invasive melanomas, only 21 (16 %) had thickness ≥ 0.8 mm and these occurred more often on head and neck than thin invasive melanomas (p = 0.02). The majority of invasive melanomas were diagnosed by excision biopsy, and WLE was carried out in a median of 3 days (melanomas ≥ 0.8 mm) and 2 days (<0.8 mm). The doctor detected the majority of in situ (83 %) and thin invasive (73 %) melanomas during surveillance, compared with 48 % of thicker invasive melanomas ≥ 0.8 mm (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In Australia, specialised primary care practice plays a major role in detection and treatment of early primary melanoma.

A mixed methods analysis of access barriers to dermatology care in a rural state

AIMS

To identify significant patient and system access barriers and facilitators to dermatology care in one rural health system with limited dermatology appointment availability.

DESIGN

Mixed methods study using data from electronic medical records, patient surveys, stakeholder semi-structured interviews, and service area dermatologist demographics. Retrospective data were collected between 1 January 2017-1 March 2018, and interviews and surveys were conducted between June 1-August 31, 2018. Participants were recruited from two primary care practices in one rural Maine regional health system.

METHODS

Findings from thematic analyses, descriptive statistics, and statistical modelling were integrated using Chi-square tests for homogeneity to develop a unified understanding. Statistical modelling using odd-ratio logistic and linear regression were performed for each outcome variable of interest.

RESULTS

Urgent referrals by primary care increased the likelihood of dermatology care overall (OR: 6.771; p = .007) and at nearby sites with limited availability (OR: 4.024; p = .024), but not at geographically further sites with higher capacities (p = .844). Referral under-diagnosis occurred in 20.8% of those biopsied. Older (p = .041) or non-working (p = .021) patients were more likely to remain unevaluated than seek more available but geographically further care.

CONCLUSIONS

In rural areas with scarce appointment availability, primary care provider diagnostic accuracy may be an important barrier of dermatology care receipt and health outcomes, especially among at-risk populations.

IMPACT

Although melanoma mortality rates are decreasing throughout the US, little is known about why rates in Maine continue to rise. This study applied a comprehensive approach to identify several patient and system access barriers to dermatology care in one underserved rural regional health system. While specific to this population and large service area, these findings will inform improvement efforts here and support broader future research efforts aimed at understanding and improving health outcomes in this rural state.

GPs' involvement in diagnosing, treating, and referring patients with suspected or confirmed primary cutaneous melanoma: a qualitative study

Background

In Australia, melanoma is managed in primary and secondary care settings. An individual concerned about a suspicious lesion typically presents first to their GP.

Aim

To identify factors influencing GPs’ decisions to diagnose, treat, or refer patients with suspected melanoma.

Design & setting

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 23 GPs working in general practice or skin cancer clinics in Australia.

Method

The semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, de-identified, and professionally transcribed. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.

Results

Considerable variation existed in GPs’ self-reported confidence and involvement in melanoma management. Multiple factors were identified as influencing GPs’ decisions to diagnose, treat, or refer patients with suspected or confirmed melanoma. Health system level factors included the overlapping roles of GPs and specialists, and access to and/or availability of specialists. Practice level factors included opportunities for formal and informal training, and having a GP with a special interest in skin cancer within their practice. GP and patient level factors included the GP’s clinical interests, the clinical features (for example, site and size) and histopathology of the suspected melanoma, eligibility for possible sentinel lymph node biopsy, and patient preferences. For some GPs, concerns over misdiagnosis and the option of referring patients at any stage in the melanoma management continuum appeared to affect their interest and confidence in melanoma management.

Conclusion

GP involvement in melanoma patient care can extend well beyond cancer screening, prevention and supportive care roles to include provision of definitive melanoma patient management. GPs with an interest in being involved in melanoma management should be encouraged and supported to develop the skills needed to manage these patients, and to refer when appropriate.

Educational interventions for primary care providers to improve clinical skin examination for skin cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Skin cancer, the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States, is a serious health care concern. Early skin cancer detection improves prognosis; most common early detection approach is a comprehensive clinical skin examination (CSE). A CSE consists of skin cancer risk assessment, head-to-toe skin examination, and skin lesion assessment. Nurse practitioners (NPs) currently lack adequate training and confidence to conduct CSE. The goal of this systematic review was to learn more about published interventions targeting CSE training for primary care NPs and/or other primary care providers. The findings were categorized based on the established procedures for intervention development.

METHODS

The databases PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, 10 articles were selected for data extraction.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a paucity of articles that report rigorously developed interventions aimed at educating primary care NPs to conduct CSE. Existing CSE interventions were not tested for efficacy or effectiveness, and the implementation methods were weak or not reported. A synthesis of the review findings revealed inadequately reported sample characteristics, vague intervention goals, unspecified frequency or duration of interventions, and lack of standardized intervention protocols.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This review builds a foundation for more rigorously developed interventions to improve CSE and provides guidance for NPs to select education on CSE and other clinical foci. Future research will guide the development and evaluate the effectiveness of CSE education, which ultimately could improve skin cancer prognosis interventions and lack of standardized intervention protocols.

Visual inspection for diagnosing cutaneous melanoma in adults

BACKGROUND

Melanoma has one of the fastest rising incidence rates of any cancer. It accounts for a small percentage of skin cancer cases but is responsible for the majority of skin cancer deaths. History-taking and visual inspection of a suspicious lesion by a clinician is usually the first in a series of 'tests' to diagnose skin cancer. Establishing the accuracy of visual inspection alone is critical to understating the potential contribution of additional tests to assist in the diagnosis of melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection for the detection of cutaneous invasive melanoma and atypical intraepidermal melanocytic variants in adults with limited prior testing and in those referred for further evaluation of a suspicious lesion. Studies were separated according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in-person) or based on remote (image-based) assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: CENTRAL; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated visual inspection in adults with lesions suspicious for melanoma, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up. We excluded studies reporting data for 'clinical diagnosis' where dermoscopy may or may not have been used.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic threshold were missing. We estimated summary sensitivities and specificities per algorithm and threshold using the bivariate hierarchical model. We investigated the impact of: in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; and observer expertise.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 49 publications reporting on a total of 51 study cohorts with 34,351 lesions (including 2499 cases), providing 134 datasets for visual inspection. Across almost all study quality domains, the majority of study reports provided insufficient information to allow us to judge the risk of bias, while in three of four domains that we assessed we scored concerns regarding applicability of study findings as 'high'. Selective participant recruitment, lack of detail regarding the threshold for deciding on a positive test result, and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.Attempts to analyse studies by degree of prior testing were hampered by a lack of relevant information and by the restricted inclusion of lesions selected for biopsy or excision. Accuracy was generally much higher for in-person diagnosis compared to image-based evaluations (relative diagnostic odds ratio of 8.54, 95% CI 2.89 to 25.3, P < 0.001). Meta-analysis of in-person evaluations that could be clearly placed on the clinical pathway showed a general trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, with the highest sensitivity (92.4%, 95% CI 26.2% to 99.8%) and lowest specificity (79.7%, 95% CI 73.7% to 84.7%) observed in participants with limited prior testing (n = 3 datasets). Summary sensitivities were lower for those referred for specialist assessment but with much higher specificities (e.g. sensitivity 76.7%, 95% CI 61.7% to 87.1%) and specificity 95.7%, 95% CI 89.7% to 98.3%) for lesions selected for excision, n = 8 datasets). These differences may be related to differences in the spectrum of included lesions, differences in the definition of a positive test result, or to variations in observer expertise. We did not find clear evidence that accuracy is improved by the use of any algorithm to assist diagnosis in all settings. Attempts to examine the effect of observer expertise in melanoma diagnosis were hindered due to poor reporting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Visual inspection is a fundamental component of the assessment of a suspicious skin lesion; however, the evidence suggests that melanomas will be missed if visual inspection is used on its own. The evidence to support its accuracy in the range of settings in which it is used is flawed and very poorly reported. Although published algorithms do not appear to improve accuracy, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the 'no algorithm' approach should be preferred in all settings. Despite the volume of research evaluating visual inspection, further prospective evaluation of the potential added value of using established algorithms according to the prior testing or diagnostic difficulty of lesions may be warranted.

Visual inspection and dermoscopy, alone or in combination, for diagnosing keratinocyte skin cancers in adults

BACKGROUND

Early accurate detection of all skin cancer types is important to guide appropriate management, to reduce morbidity and to improve survival. Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is almost always a localised skin cancer with potential to infiltrate and damage surrounding tissue, whereas a minority of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCCs) and invasive melanomas are higher-risk skin cancers with the potential to metastasise and cause death. Dermoscopy has become an important tool to assist specialist clinicians in the diagnosis of melanoma, and is increasingly used in primary-care settings. Dermoscopy is a precision-built handheld illuminated magnifier that allows more detailed examination of the skin down to the level of the superficial dermis. Establishing the value of dermoscopy over and above visual inspection for the diagnosis of BCC or cSCC in primary- and secondary-care settings is critical to understanding its potential contribution to appropriate skin cancer triage, including referral of higher-risk cancers to secondary care, the identification of low-risk skin cancers that might be treated in primary care and to provide reassurance to those with benign skin lesions who can be safely discharged.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection and dermoscopy, alone or in combination, for the detection of (a) BCC and (b) cSCC, in adults. We separated studies according to whether the diagnosis was recorded face-to-face (in person) or based on remote (image-based) assessment.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of the following databases from inception up to August 2016: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; CPCI; Zetoc; Science Citation Index; US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register; NIHR Clinical Research Network Portfolio Database; and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We studied reference lists and published systematic review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies of any design that evaluated visual inspection or dermoscopy or both in adults with lesions suspicious for skin cancer, compared with a reference standard of either histological confirmation or clinical follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted all data using a standardised data extraction and quality assessment form (based on QUADAS-2). We contacted authors of included studies where information related to the target condition or diagnostic thresholds were missing. We estimated accuracy using hierarchical summary ROC methods. We undertook analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests. To facilitate interpretation of results, we computed values of sensitivity at the point on the SROC curve with 80% fixed specificity and values of specificity with 80% fixed sensitivity. We investigated the impact of in-person test interpretation; use of a purposely-developed algorithm to assist diagnosis; and observer expertise.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 publications reporting on 24 study cohorts, providing 27 visual inspection datasets (8805 lesions; 2579 malignancies) and 33 dermoscopy datasets (6855 lesions; 1444 malignancies). The risk of bias was mainly low for the index test (for dermoscopy evaluations) and reference standard domains, particularly for in-person evaluations, and high or unclear for participant selection, application of the index test for visual inspection and for participant flow and timing. We scored concerns about the applicability of study findings as of 'high' or 'unclear' concern for almost all studies across all domains assessed. Selective participant recruitment, lack of reproducibility of diagnostic thresholds and lack of detail on observer expertise were particularly problematic.The detection of BCC was reported in 28 datasets; 15 on an in-person basis and 13 image-based. Analysis of studies by prior testing of participants and according to observer expertise was not possible due to lack of data. Studies were primarily conducted in participants referred for specialist assessment of lesions with available histological classification. We found no clear differences in accuracy between dermoscopy studies undertaken in person and those which evaluated images. The lack of effect observed may be due to other sources of heterogeneity, including variations in the types of skin lesion studied, in dermatoscopes used, or in the use of algorithms and varying thresholds for deciding on a positive test result.Meta-analysis found in-person evaluations of dermoscopy (7 evaluations; 4683 lesions and 363 BCCs) to be more accurate than visual inspection alone for the detection of BCC (8 evaluations; 7017 lesions and 1586 BCCs), with a relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR) of 8.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.5 to 19.3; P < 0.001). This corresponds to predicted differences in sensitivity of 14% (93% versus 79%) at a fixed specificity of 80% and predicted differences in specificity of 22% (99% versus 77%) at a fixed sensitivity of 80%. We observed very similar results for the image-based evaluations.When applied to a hypothetical population of 1000 lesions, of which 170 are BCC (based on median BCC prevalence across studies), an increased sensitivity of 14% from dermoscopy would lead to 24 fewer BCCs missed, assuming 166 false positive results from both tests. A 22% increase in specificity from dermoscopy with sensitivity fixed at 80% would result in 183 fewer unnecessary excisions, assuming 34 BCCs missed for both tests. There was not enough evidence to assess the use of algorithms or structured checklists for either visual inspection or dermoscopy.Insufficient data were available to draw conclusions on the accuracy of either test for the detection of cSCCs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Dermoscopy may be a valuable tool for the diagnosis of BCC as an adjunct to visual inspection of a suspicious skin lesion following a thorough history-taking including assessment of risk factors for keratinocyte cancer. The evidence primarily comes from secondary-care (referred) populations and populations with pigmented lesions or mixed lesion types. There is no clear evidence supporting the use of currently-available formal algorithms to assist dermoscopy diagnosis.

Melanoma early detection and awareness: how countries developing melanoma awareness programs could benefit from melanoma-proficient countries

Risk factors for melanoma are well known and have guided plans for primary and secondary prevention. The presentation of the disease, however, varies widely depending on the geographic area, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. For this reason, many countries have developed specific strategies to increase public awareness and favor early diagnosis. Awareness campaigns, doctor education, and screening of high-risk subjects have all contributed to improve disease outcome in developed countries. The role of primary care physicians is particularly relevant in this regard. Developing countries are trying to implement similar measures. Future efforts to further improve the efficacy of preventive strategies should focus on populations that usually escape campaigns, such as elderly men and people with low socioeconomic status. Fast-growing tumors also require specific attention.

Melanoma in situ: Part I. Epidemiology, screening, and clinical features

The incidence of melanoma has steadily increased over the past 3 decades, with melanoma in situ comprising a disproportionately high percentage of the rising incidence. Our understanding of melanoma in situ has been shaped by epidemiologic and clinical studies. Central to a review of melanoma in situ is a focus on its epidemiology, pathology, biologic behavior, treatment, and clinical outcome, which may differ significantly from that of malignant melanoma. Part I of this continuing medical education article reviews the epidemiology, risk factors, and clinical features of melanoma in situ; part II covers the histopathology, treatment options, and clinical management.

Choosing to biopsy or refer suspicious melanocytic lesions in general practice

Background

General practitioners (GPs) are involved in the management of most melanocytic skin lesions in Australia. A high quality biopsy technique is a crucial first step in management, as it is recognized that poor techniques can mislead, delay, or miss a diagnosis of melanoma. There has been little published on the biopsy decisions and techniques of GPs. This study aims to describe the current management choices made by GPs for suspicious melanocytic skin lesions and to compare their choices with the best practice guidelines.

Methods

An anonymous survey of GPs presented with three clinical scenarios with increasing complexity of melanoma in which a referral or biopsy decision was specified.

Results

391 mailed surveys with a 76.3% response rate. Mean biopsy experience was 4.14 biopsies per GP per month. The rates of choosing to refer among the three scenarios were 31%, 52% and 81% respectively, with referral to surgery being the most common choice (81%). Most biopsy techniques (55%) were chosen according to best practice guidelines, although non-guideline biopsy techniques chosen included shave (n = 10), punch biopsy (n = 57), wide excisions (n = 65), and flaps (n = 10). The few GPs (n = 5) who identified themselves as skin specialist GPs were no more likely to adhere to guidelines than their colleagues.

Conclusion

A majority of referrals and biopsies were chosen by GPs according to best practice guidelines, but concern remains for the high proportion of GPs making non-guideline based choices. How GPs choose to biopsy or refer needs further training, audit, and research if Australia is to improve the outcome of melanoma management in general practice.

Comparison of Dermatologists' and Nondermatologists' Diagnostic Accuracy for Malignant Melanoma

Background:

The incidence of malignant melanoma is increasing annually in Canada and patients present to nondermatologist groups (NDGs) first to have suspicious lesions examined.

Objective:

To determine the ability of Canadian NDGs in the recognition and management of melanoma.

Methods:

A survey of 25 malignant and benign skin lesion photographs was distributed to dermatologists and NDGs across Canada. Participants were asked to list whether the lesions were malignant or benign, and could answer ‘uncertain’ if needed. Dermatologists were subsequently asked if they would biopsy the lesion, whereas NDGs were asked if they would biopsy/refer.

Results:

Dermatologists achieved mean sensitivities, specificities, and diagnostic accuracies of 0.79, 0.77, and 0.71, respectively. They consistently decided to biopsy malignant lesions. NDGs attained mean scores of 0.61, 0.62, and 0.53, respectively, and selected to refer/biopsy the majority of lesions, malignant and benign.

Conclusions:

NDGs should receive more dermatologic training in the recognition of malignant melanoma.

Skin cancer education for primary care physicians: a systematic review of published evaluated interventions

BACKGROUND

Early detection of melanoma may provide an opportunity to positively impact melanoma mortality. Numerous skin cancer educational interventions have been developed for primary care physicians (PCPs) to improve diagnostic accuracy. Standardized training is also a prerequisite for formal testing of melanoma screening in the primary care setting.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review to determine the extent of evaluated interventions designed to educate PCPs about skin cancer, including melanoma.

DESIGN

Relevant studies in the English language were identified through systemic searches performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, and Cochrane through December 2010. Supplementary information was obtained from corresponding authors of the included studies when necessary.

APPROACH

Studies eligible for inclusion formally evaluated skin cancer education interventions and were designed primarily for PCPs. Excluded studies lacked a specified training intervention, used decision-making software, focused solely on risk factor identification, or did not directly educate or assess participants. Twenty studies met the selection criteria. Data were extracted according to intervention content and delivery format, and study outcomes.

KEY RESULTS

All interventions included instructions about skin cancer diagnosis, but otherwise varied in content. Curricula utilized six distinct educational techniques, usually incorporating more than one. Intervention duration varied from 12 min to over 6 h. Eight of the 20 studies were randomized trials. Most studies (18/20, 90%) found a significant improvement in at least one of the following five outcome categories: knowledge, competence, confidence, diagnostic performance, or systems outcomes. Competence was most commonly measured; no study evaluated all categories. Variability in study design, interventions, and outcome measures prevented correlation of outcomes with intervention characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the development of many isolated educational interventions, few have been tested rigorously or evaluated under sufficient standardized conditions to allow for quantitative comparison. Improved and rigorously tested skin cancer educational interventions for PCPs with outcome measures focusing on changes in performance are needed.

Advances and short comings in the early diagnosis of melanoma

Malignant melanoma kills more people each year than any other skin cancer, with approximately 8000 lives lost and a cost of over 3 billion dollars annually in the US alone. Tumor depth is the most important prognostic factor in melanoma. Thus, early detection has the potential to diagnose melanoma when lesions are thinner, and to improve survival in primary melanomas. In this review, we discuss the implications, barriers, and advantages of melanoma screening, and describe the currently employed methods of detection, newly available modalities, and current areas of research. We also discuss the efficacy, advantages and disadvantages, and clinical practicality of each, and suggest various means of combining different methodologies as well as tailoring various strategies to individual patient needs.

[Effectiveness of primary care physicians and dermatologists in the diagnosis of skin cancer: a comparative study in the same geographic area]

BACKGROUND

skin cancer is the most common malignant tumor in white individuals. Early diagnosis and treatment are key factors in reducing morbidity. We performed a prospective observational study throughout 2008 to assess the ability of primary care physicians to diagnose nonmelanoma skin cancer.

METHODS

the study was undertaken in a single geographic area corresponding to the region served by a primary health care center. Patients who were referred to a dermatologist were included if the primary care physician indicated skin cancer in the differential diagnosis on the referral form. Patients were also included if the dermatologist suspected skin cancer even if the referral from primary care had not indicated it.

RESULTS

primary care physicians had a sensitivity of 0.45 and a specificity of 0.16 for the diagnosis of skin cancer, whereas dermatologists had a sensitivity of 0.97 and a specificity of 0.75. The α statistic as a measure of agreement was -0.56.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of primary care physicians to diagnose skin cancer was appreciably lower than that of dermatologists. This may result in substantial delays in the provision of appropriate care for patients with skin cancer considering the role played by primary care physicians in screening for the disease in the Spanish national health system.

Accuracy of SIAscopy for pigmented skin lesions encountered in primary care: development and validation of a new diagnostic algorithm

Background

Diagnosing pigmented skin lesions in general practice is challenging. SIAscopy has been shown to increase diagnostic accuracy for melanoma in referred populations. We aimed to develop and validate a scoring system for SIAscopic diagnosis of pigmented lesions in primary care.

Methods

This study was conducted in two consecutive settings in the UK and Australia, and occurred in three stages: 1) Development of the primary care scoring algorithm (PCSA) on a sub-set of lesions from the UK sample; 2) Validation of the PCSA on a different sub-set of lesions from the same UK sample; 3) Validation of the PCSA on a new set of lesions from an Australian primary care population. Patients presenting with a pigmented lesion were recruited from 6 general practices in the UK and 2 primary care skin cancer clinics in Australia. The following data were obtained for each lesion: clinical history; SIAscan; digital photograph; and digital dermoscopy. SIAscans were interpreted by an expert and validated against histopathology where possible, or expert clinical review of all available data for each lesion.

Results

A total of 858 patients with 1,211 lesions were recruited. Most lesions were benign naevi (64.8%) or seborrhoeic keratoses (22.1%); 1.2% were melanoma. The original SIAscopic diagnostic algorithm did not perform well because of the higher prevalence of seborrhoeic keratoses and haemangiomas seen in primary care. A primary care scoring algorithm (PCSA) was developed to account for this. In the UK sample the PCSA had the following characteristics for the diagnosis of 'suspicious': sensitivity 0.50 (0.18-0.81); specificity 0.84 (0.78-0.88); PPV 0.09 (0.03-0.22); NPV 0.98 (0.95-0.99). In the Australian sample the PCSA had the following characteristics for the diagnosis of 'suspicious': sensitivity 0.44 (0.32-0.58); specificity 0.95 (0.93-0.97); PPV 0.52 (0.38-0.66); NPV 0.95 (0.92-0.96). In an analysis of lesions for which histological diagnosis was available (n = 111), the PCSA had a significantly greater Area Under the Curve than the 7-point checklist for the diagnosis of melanoma (0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.95 versus 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.78; p = 0.02 for difference).

Conclusions

The PCSA could have a useful role in improving primary care management of pigmented skin lesions. Further work is needed to develop and validate the PCSA in other primary care populations and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of GP management of pigmented lesions using SIAscopy.

Protocol for the MoleMate UK Trial: a randomised controlled trial of the MoleMate system in the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care [ISRCTN 79932379]

Background

Suspicious pigmented lesions are a common presenting problem in general practice consultations; while the majority are benign a small minority are melanomas. Differentiating melanomas from other pigmented lesions in primary care is challenging: currently, 95% of all lesions referred to a UK specialist are benign. The MoleMate system is a new diagnostic aid, incorporating a hand-held SIAscopy scanner with a primary care diagnostic algorithm. This trial tests the hypothesis that adding the MoleMate system to current best primary care practice will increase the proportion of appropriate referrals of suspicious pigmented lesions to secondary care compared with current best practice alone.

Methods/design

The MoleMate UK Trial is a primary care based multi-centre randomised controlled trial, with randomisation at patient level using a validated block randomisation method for two age groups (45 years and under; 46 years and over). We aim to recruit adult patients seen in general practice with a pigmented skin lesion that cannot immediately be diagnosed as benign and the patient reassured. The trial has a 'two parallel groups' design, comparing 'best practice' with 'best practice' plus the MoleMate system in the intervention group. The primary outcome is the positive predictive value (PPV) of referral defined as the proportion of referred lesions seen by secondary care experts that are considered 'clinically significant' (i.e. biopsied or monitored). Secondary outcomes include: the sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) of the decision not to refer; clinical outcomes (melanoma thickness, 5 year melanoma incidence and mortality); clinician outcomes (Index of Suspicion, confidence, learning effects); patient outcomes (satisfaction, general and cancer-specific worry), and cost-utility.

Discussion

The MoleMate UK Trial tests a new technology designed to improve the management of suspicious pigmented lesions in primary care. If effective, the MoleMate system could reduce the burden on skin cancer clinics of patients with benign pigmented skin lesions, and improve patient care in general practice.

KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the care of kidney transplant recipients

The 2009 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) clinical practice guideline on the monitoring, management, and treatment of kidney transplant recipients is intended to assist the practitioner caring for adults and children after kidney transplantation. The guideline development process followed an evidence-based approach, and management recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant treatment trials. Critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The guideline makes recommendations for immunosuppression, graft monitoring, as well as prevention and treatment of infection, cardiovascular disease, malignancy, and other complications that are common in kidney transplant recipients, including hematological and bone disorders. Limitations of the evidence, especially on the lack of definitive clinical outcome trials, are discussed and suggestions are provided for future research.

Screening and early detection of skin cancer

Skin cancer is the most common type of cancer in the United States. US incidence of malignant melanoma is increasing faster than any other type of cancer. To minimize increasing morbidity and mortality rates, it is imperative that appropriate screening and early detection of skin cancer become more widespread. All physicians who see patients clinically have the potential for detecting skin cancers. The scope of skin cancer as a health-care problem is discussed. Evidence for the effectiveness and necessity of skin cancer screening and early detection is presented. Costs of screening and detection are discussed in relation to impact on treatment costs and overall costs of skin cancer burden. Current methods and recommendations for skin cancer screening and detection are reviewed, especially with regard to individuals and populations that may require more specialized or intensive screening and follow-up. Newer approaches involving instrument-assisted screening and detection of skin cancer are under intense development, and these exciting emerging technologies are reviewed.

Diagnosing skin cancer in primary care: how do mainstream general practitioners compare with primary care skin cancer clinic doctors?

OBJECTIVE

To measure and compare the casemix and diagnostic accuracy of excised or biopsied skin lesions managed by mainstream general practitioners and doctors within primary care skin cancer clinics.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Prospective comparative study of 104 GPs and 50 skin cancer clinic doctors in south-eastern Queensland, involving 28 755 patient encounters. The study was conducted in 2005.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of each type of skin lesion; sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the clinical diagnosis against histology; number needed to excise or biopsy (NNE) for a diagnosis of skin cancer.

RESULTS

GPs excised or biopsied 3175 skin lesions (mean 2.5/week) including 743 basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) (23.4%), 704 squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) (22.2%) and 49 melanomas (1.5%). Skin cancer clinic doctors excised or biopsied 7941 skin lesions (mean 34/week), including 2701 BCCs (34.0%), 1274 SCCs (16.0%) and 103 melanomas (1.3%). Overall, sensitivity for diagnosing any skin cancer was similar for skin cancer clinic doctors (0.94) and GPs (0.91), although higher for skin cancer clinic doctors for BCC (0.89 v 0.79; P < 0.01) and melanoma (0.60 v 0.29; P < 0.01). The overall NNE was similar for skin cancer clinic doctors (1.9; 95% CI, 1.8%-2.1%) and GPs (2.1; 95% CI, 1.9%-2.3%). This did not change after adjusting for years of clinical experience.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs and skin cancer clinic doctors in Queensland treat large numbers of skin cancers and diagnose these with overall high sensitivity. The two groups diagnosed skin cancer with similar accuracy.

The effect of an educational programme to improve the skills of general practitioners in diagnosing melanocytic/pigmented lesions

BACKGROUND

Skin cancer is a major public health issue in fair-skinned populations, and general practitioners (GPs) play an important role in the diagnosis and management of this disease.

AIMS

To evaluate a self-instructional education module with audit and feedback, designed to increase the skills of GPs in diagnosing melanocytic lesions and skin cancer.

METHODS

This study, conducted in Queensland, Australia, included 16 GPs who participated in an 18-month programme, comprising a 6-month baseline audit of skin excisions, a 6-month educational programme and a 6-month posteducation audit.

RESULTS

The overall diagnostic accuracy of malignant lesions was 63.2% (95% CI 60.0-66.3) during baseline and 64.5% (95% CI 61.1-67.7) posteducation. Significant improvements were seen posteducation in the proportion of melanocytic lesions confirmed as malignant (6.1% baseline and 13.5% posteducation, chi(2) = 6.6, P = 0.01). GPs with < 15 years of practice recorded significantly lower levels of diagnostic accuracy at baseline compared with those with >/= 25 years of practice (P = 0.001). There were no differences in diagnostic skill posteducation according to years of practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The education programme improved the malignant : benign ratio of melanocytic lesions, resulting in a doubling in the number of melanomas diagnosed. We found that GPs with less experience benefited most from the programme, indicating that tailoring of programmes to individual skills and years of practice might be beneficial.

Treatment Patterns and Cost of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Management

INTRODUCTION

Nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) is the most common form of cancer in the United States, more common than all other cancers combined. The factors that affect the cost of skin cancer management are not well defined.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to estimate cost of episodes of NMSC care and the factors that impact those costs.

DESIGN

Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS) data from 1999 to 2000 were used to assess costs of episodes of NMSC care. MCBS estimates of the number of episodes occurring in three service settings (physician's office, outpatient/ambulatory surgical center, or hospital) and demographics were obtained.

RESULTS

There were 497 episodes of care in 372 patients. Half the episodes were treated by dermatologists, and two-thirds were managed in physicians' offices. The mean episode cost for management in the office setting was 500 dollars (SD, +/- 487 dollars), and costs were higher when the episodes were treated in either the ambulatory surgical center or the hospital settings, 935 dollars (SD, +/- 456 dollars) and 4,345 dollars (SD, +/- 4939 dollars), respectively.

CONCLUSION

With the rising incidence and cost of NMSC to Medicare, it is increasingly important to preserve the low-cost management of this disease. Maintaining care of NMSC in the office-based setting is more cost-efficient than utilizing ambulatory surgical centers or hospital operating rooms.

Diagnosing and managing cutaneous pigmented lesions: primary care physicians versus dermatologists

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians (PCPs) are often expected to screen for melanomas and refer patients with suspicious pigmented lesions to dermatologists.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether there is a difference between dermatologists and PCPs in accurately diagnosing melanoma and appropriately managing (based on decisions to refer/biopsy) suspicious pigmented lesions.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS

A survey based on a random sample of 30 photographs of pigmented lesions with known pathology was administered to 101 dermatologists and 115 PCPs from October 2001 to January 2003.

MEASUREMENTS

Likelihoods that a photographed lesion was melanoma and that the lesion should be biopsied/referred were scored on a 1 to 10 scale. Accuracy of melanoma diagnosis and appropriateness of pigmented lesion management were compared between dermatologists and PCPs by using the areas under (AUC) the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Dermatologists were superior to PCPs in diagnosing melanomas (AUC 0.89 vs 0.80, P<.001) and appropriately managing pigmented lesions (AUC .84 vs 0.76, P<.001). PCPs who tended to biopsy lesions themselves did better at managing pigmented lesions than PCPs who did not perform biopsies. Dermatology training during residency did not significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of PCPs nor their management of pigmented lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermatologists have both better diagnostic accuracy and ability to manage pigmented lesions than PCPs. Yet, there is a shortage of dermatologists to meet the demand of accurate melanoma screening. More innovative strategies are needed to better train PCPs and enhance skin cancer screening.

Do Centralised Skin Screening Clinics Increase Participation in Melanoma Screening (Australia)?

OBJECTIVE

To compare during the first 12 months of a 3-year randomised community-based trial of population screening for melanoma three methods of screening delivery: skin screening within day-to-day primary care (Group A); screening in dedicated skin screening clinics either organised privately by local physicians (Group B); or organised centrally with participants referred back to their physicians for definitive diagnosis and management (Group C).

METHODS

The trial involved 18 regional communities in Queensland, Australia. Of the nine communities randomised to the intervention group, three communities were allocated to each of the Groups A, B or C. All intervention communities received a community education programme and an education and support programme for primary care physicians. The self-reported prevalence of clinical skin examination was assessed by surveying 3,110 residents (66.9% participation rate) aged > or = 30 years by telephone at baseline, and 14,060 residents (70.9% participation rate) by self-administered mailed questionnaire at 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

At baseline the prevalence of skin screening did not differ between intervention and control communities. At 12-month follow-up, participants within intervention communities reported skin screening significantly more frequently (20.9% versus 10.9%; p < 0.001). Within intervention communities, the prevalence of clinical skin examinations in Group A was similar to that of control communities (12.6% and 10.9%; p = 0.33). Communities in Group B (16.5%; p = 0.001) and Group C (27.1%; p < 0.001) reported significantly higher prevalence of clinical examinations than the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The provision of centrally organised skin screening clinics significantly increases skin screening rates and may have relevance for future melanoma control programmes.

What motivates men age ≥ 50 years to participate in a screening program for melanoma?

BACKGROUND

The screening behavior and screening outcomes of men age > or =50 years was investigated within a randomized controlled trial of a community-based intervention of screening for melanoma, consisting of a community education program, an education program for medical practitioners, and the provision of dedicated skin-screening clinics.

METHODS

Data from cross-sectional telephone surveys before (559 completed interviews), at the end (591 completed interview), and at 2 years after the intervention (445 completed interviews) were analyzed. In addition, the authors analyzed data from skin-screening clinics within the intervention program (3355 men age > or =50 years participated).

RESULTS

During the intervention period men age > or =50 years increased both their screening behavior and intention to screen. Those men age > or =50 years who reported a past history of removal of a mole as well as other risk factors for skin cancer and positive attitudes toward screening were more likely to participate in skin screening across time. Men age > or =50 years accounted for 20.5% of all skin-screening clinic attendees, 31.3% of those referred for a suspicious lesion, 48.5% of melanomas, and 45% of all keratinocyte carcinomas diagnosed within the screening program, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention program successfully motivated men age > or =50 years to attend screening for skin cancer, resulting in the highest yield of skin cancer within this subgroup of the population. Messages addressing skin cancer risk factors and attitudes toward skin cancer and screening could be used to target a screening program for melanoma toward men age > or =50 years.

Évaluation d’une campagne de formation des médecins généralistes et des médecins du travail au dépistage du mélanome dans le Haut-Rhin

INTRODUCTION

Dermatologists frequently provide training for general practitioners, but such training is not systematic and evaluation is rare.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A training campaign for general practitioners and occupational physicians in melanoma screening was carried out in the Haut-Rhin Department of France in 2004. The 630 general practitioners and 120 occupational physicians in this geographic department received repeated mail together with materials (posters and booklets) for their waiting rooms, and they were invited to attend medical training sessions. The sessions consisted of 10 photographs for initial evaluation, provision of epidemiological information, training in identification of subjects at risk and diagnosis of pigmented lesions, with a further 10 photographs for evaluation at the end. The 20 evaluation photographs were randomly selected for each session from 40 photographs comprising 18 cases of melanomas, 14 of nevi, 4 of basal cell carcinomas and 4 of seborrheic keratoses. At the end of each session, the physicians returned 2 anonymous questionnaires containing their overall assessment of the campaign (Q1) and their answers concerning the 20 evaluation photographs (proposed diagnosis and management strategy) (Q2). The questionnaires were then analyzed. The 40 evaluation photographs were also tested on 47 dermatologists.

RESULTS

Three hundred and fifty physicians - 278/630 general practitioners (44%) and 72/120 occupational physicians (60%) - attended 18 medical training sessions. Response levels for questionnaires Q1 and Q2 were 88% and 90% respectively. Almost all of the physicians involved considered the campaign to be warranted. At the end of the training sessions, 96% felt they were better equipped to identify subjects at risk for melanoma and 53% (58% of general practitioners and 39% of occupational physicians, p=0.03) felt they had greatly improved their ability to diagnose pigmented lesions. The median number of correct replies concerning the evaluation photographs increased from 6/10 to 7/10 between the initial evaluation photographs and the final evaluation photographs (p<0.0001), with no difference being seen between the general practitioners and occupational physicians. The median number of correct replies from the 47 dermatologists was 35/40 (8.75/10). The most striking improvement noted during the campaign concerned the ability to identify melanomas. The figure rose from an initial 59% at the start of the session (initial evaluation photographs) (versus 86% for the dermatologists) to 84% by the end of the session (final evaluation photographs) (p<0.0001). The management strategy proposed for photographs of melanoma (irrespective of the proposed diagnosis) was judged "appropriate" in 86% of cases at the start of the session versus 94% at the end of the session (p<0.001). Seborrheic keratosis was correctly identified in 43% of cases by the general practitioners/occupational physicians versus 75% by the dermatologists, and was confused with melanoma in 22% of cases by the general practitioners/occupational physicians versus 5% by the dermatologists. No improvement was seen during the training session in terms of the ability of the general practitioners/occupational physicians to correctly identify seborrheic keratosis. The majority of participants indicated their willingness to participate in the screening program and asked to receive information on melanoma on a regular basis.

DISCUSSION

This initial study shows the immediate impact of medical training sessions on general practitioners/occupational physicians to be important in terms of sensitization and moderate but significant in terms of improved diagnosis of pigmented lesions. The longer term impact, as well as the impact of the campaign on physicians not taking part in the medical training sessions, remains unknown. This study militates in favor of the involvement of general practitioners and occupational physicians in mass screening for melanoma in collaboration with dermatologists. The 2004 campaign in the Haut-Rhin Department also included information for the general public. The primary evaluation criterion of the campaign will be change in incidence of thick melanomas recorded by the departmental cancer registry.

A retrospective biopsy study of the clinical diagnostic accuracy of common skin diseases by different specialties compared with dermatology

BACKGROUND

With the recent trend for nondermatologists to treat dermatologic disorders, this retrospective biopsy study reviews the accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of physicians of different specialties performing surgical dermatologic procedures.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the diagnostic abilities of nondermatologist physicians who performed various types of skin biopsies and compared them with those of dermatologists.

METHODS

The clinical diagnoses of family physicians, plastic, general, and orthopedic surgeons, and internists and pediatricians versus dermatologists were correlated with the histopathologic diagnoses. In total, 4451 cases were analyzed.

RESULTS

Dermatologists diagnosed twice the number of neoplastic and cystic skin lesions correctly (75%) than nondermatologists (40%). The clinical diagnosis rendered by family practitioners matched the histopathologic diagnosis in only 26% of neoplastic and cystic skin lesions. Plastic surgeons, who performed the largest number of cutaneous surgical procedures among the nondermatologists, did better in the recognition of skin tumors than family physicians, but still had a diagnostic accuracy rate of only 45%. Inflammatory skin diseases were correctly diagnosed in 71% of the cases by dermatologists but in only 34% of the cases by nondermatologists.

LIMITATIONS

A limitation of this retrospective, unblinded study is the use of the clinical data from the pathology requisition form as a surrogate for clinical diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall accuracy of the clinical diagnosis depends heavily on the clinicopathologic correlation. Without sufficient clinical data, the histopathologic diagnosis will be limited or restricted. This review concludes that without basic dermatology knowledge, clinicopathologic correlation is compromised.

Evaluation of aid to diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions in general practice: controlled trial randomised by practice

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether an aid to the diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions reduces the ratio of benign lesions to melanomas excised in general practice.

DESIGN

Controlled trial randomised by practice.

SETTING

General practices in Perth, Western Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

468 general practitioners in 223 practices.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention practices were given an algorithm and instant camera to assist with the diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions. All practices were given national guidelines on managing melanoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Ratio of benign pigmented lesions to melanomas excised. Analyses conducted with and without inclusion of seborrhoeic keratoses.

RESULTS

At baseline the ratios of benign to malignant lesions were lower in the intervention group than in the control group. During the trial period the ratios were higher in the intervention group (19:1 v 17:1 without seborrhoeic keratoses and 29:1 v 26:1 with seborrhoeic keratoses). After adjustment for patients' age, sex, and socioeconomic status, the ratio was 1.02 times higher (95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.51, P = 0.94) in the intervention group when seborrhoeic keratoses were not included and 1.03 times higher (0.71 to 1.50, P = 0.88) when seborrhoeic keratoses were included. General practitioners in the intervention group were less likely than those in the control group to excise the most recent pigmented skin lesion they managed (22% v 48%, P < 0.001) and to refer the patient to a specialist (16% v 27%, P = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of the algorithm and camera did not decrease the ratio of benign pigmented skin lesions to melanomas excised by general practitioners.

Nonmelanoma skin cancer: an episode of care management approach

BACKGROUND

The incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) was estimated at 1.3-million cases for the year 2000 and is on the rise. It is the most common form of cancer in the United States, more common than all other cancers combined. To determine the contributors to the cost of NMSC care, an episode of care of NMSC needed to be defined.

OBJECTIVE

To define and validate an episode of NMSC care.

DESIGN

Using survey and Medicare part A and part B claims data of the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), 1992 to 1995, an algorithm was created to define an episode of care for the diagnosis and treatment of an NMSC. MCBS estimates of the number of episodes occurring in three service settings (physician's office, outpatient/ambulatory surgical center, or hospital) and demographics were compared to data from independent datasets, including the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS, 1995), the National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery (NSAS, 1994 to 1996), and the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS, 1992 to 1997).

RESULTS

Pathology claims for NMSC diagnosis served as the indicator of NMSC episodes. The procedures, office visits, and tests that resulted in and from the pathology specimen were identified. The sum of the associated charges to Medicare or Medicare payments for all identified claims equaled the total cost of the episode of NMSC care. For example, these preliminary results demonstrated significant differences between medical and surgical subspecialties.

CONCLUSION

This study defined and validated a model of an episode of NMSC care. This model's initial results serve as preliminary data for the design of further studies addressing the differences between specialties and settings. The use of this model will allow identification of factors that determine the cost of NMSC treatment and that are associated with higher cost of care.

Screening for melanoma

This article describes major screening studies of the past two decades, discusses the evidence-based screening recommendations, highlights the need to screen high-risk and previously unscreened populations, and concludes with suggestions for risk assessment and physician-nurse training in the skin cancer examination.

The impact of the basic skin cancer triage curriculum on providers' skills, confidence, and knowledge in skin cancer control

BACKGROUND

Primary care providers (PCPs) are in the unique position of being able to deliver preventive health care services to the majority of the general population. Early detection of skin cancer may reduce mortality, but many PCPs do not participate in skin cancer control activities due to lack of training and confidence. We sought to evaluate the effect of a 2-h, Basic Skin Cancer Triage (BSCT) curriculum in overcoming these barriers.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 28 primary care providers participated in a 2-h training curriculum. Assessments included skills (evaluated by a 20-item slide quiz), confidence, knowledge, and attitudes measured pre- and post training.

RESULTS

Provider ability to accurately diagnose and triage lesions significantly improved (46 to 64%, P < 0.0001, and 61 to 71%, P < 0.0001, respectively). The greatest improvement in triage ability occurred in providers ability to appropriately reassure patients about lesions (49 to 70%, P < 0.0001). There were also significant improvements in both knowledge of skin cancer control practices (68 to 74% correct answers, P = 0.026) and confidence in ability to provide skin cancer preventive services (2.95 to 4.13 on a 1 to 5 scale, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in the BSCT curriculum may improve providers' diagnostic and triage accuracy of skin cancer as well as increase their knowledge of skin cancer and confidence in their provision of skin cancer control activities. Defining the full potential impact of this curriculum requires further evaluation.

Audit of a melanoma screening day in the U.K.: clinical results, participant satisfaction and perceived value

BACKGROUND

The incidence of cutaneous malignant melanoma (MM) has risen significantly over the last 50 years in caucasian populations. Mortality is related to the Breslow thickness of the lesion, and early detection followed by complete surgical excision is crucial to reducing this. Skin screening events have been advocated as a means of detecting greater numbers of MMs in the earlier and thinner stages.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility and effectiveness of this approach in the U.K.

METHODS

The Department of Dermatology, Singleton Hospital, Swansea, U.K. offered a 1-day melanoma screening event in summer 1998 at which 832 consecutive individuals were seen. A postal questionnaire 1 year after the event audited participant perceived value and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Three MMs were identified (yield 1 : 277), all < 0.75 mm in thickness. Despite high participant satisfaction and perceived value, the pick-up rate of malignancy was significantly lower than at rapid access pigmented lesion clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

In a country such as the U.K., with comprehensive health coverage and a low incidence of MM, triage for melanoma and referral to specialists by general practitioners may be more cost and time effective.

Screening for skin cancer

CONTEXT

Malignant melanoma is often lethal, and its incidence in the United States has increased rapidly over the past 2 decades. Nonmelanoma skin cancer is seldom lethal, but, if advanced, can cause severe disfigurement and morbidity. Early detection and treatment of melanoma might reduce mortality, while early detection and treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer might prevent major disfigurement and to a lesser extent prevent mortality. Current recommendations from professional societies regarding screening for skin cancer vary.

OBJECTIVE

To examine published data on the effectiveness of routine screening for skin cancer by a primary care provider, as part of an assessment for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the MEDLINE database for papers published between 1994 and June 1999, using search terms for screening, physical examination, morbidity, and skin neoplasms. For information on accuracy of screening tests, we used the search terms sensitivity and specificity. We identified the most important studies from before 1994 from the Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, second edition, and from high-quality reviews. We used reference lists and expert recommendations to locate additional articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently reviewed a subset of 500 abstracts. Once consistency was established, the remainder were reviewed by one reviewer. We included studies if they contained data on yield of screening, screening tests, risk factors, risk assessment, effectiveness of early detection, or cost effectiveness.

DATA EXTRACTION

We abstracted the following descriptive information from full-text published studies of screening and recorded it in an electronic database: type of screening study, study design, setting, population, patient recruitment, screening test description, examiner, advertising targeted at high-risk groups or not targeted, reported risk factors of participants, and procedure for referrals. We also abstracted the yield of screening data including probabilities and numbers of referrals, types of suspected skin cancers, biopsies, confirmed skin cancers, and stages and thickness of skin cancers. For studies that reported test performance, we recorded the definition of a suspicious lesion, the "gold-standard" determination of disease, and the number of true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative test results. When possible, positive predictive values, likelihood ratios, sensitivity, and specificity were recorded.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No randomized or case-control studies have been done that demonstrate that routine screening for melanoma by primary care providers reduces morbidity or mortality. Basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma are very common, but detection and treatment in the absence of formal screening are almost always curative. No controlled studies have shown that formal screening programs will improve this already high cure rate. While the efficacy of screening has not been established, the screening procedures themselves are noninvasive, and the follow-up test, skin biopsy, has low morbidity. Five studies from mass screening programs reported the accuracy of skin examination as a screening test. One of these, a prospective study, tracked patients with negative results to determine the number of patients with false-negative results. In this study, the sensitivity of screening for skin cancer was 94% and specificity was 98%. Several recent case-control studies confirm earlier evidence that risk of melanoma rises with the presence of atypical moles and/or many common moles. One well-done prospective study demonstrated that risk assessment by limited physical exam identified a relatively small (<10%) group of primary care patients for more thorough evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence addressing the accuracy of routine screening by primary care providers for early detection of melanoma or nonmelanoma skin cancer ranged from poor to fair. We found no studies that assessed the effectiveness of periodic skin examination by a clinician in reducing melanoma mortality. Both self-assessment of risk factors or clinician examination can classify a small proportion of patients as at highest risk for melanoma. Skin cancer screening, perhaps using a risk-assessment technique to identify high-risk patients who are seeing a physician for other reasons, merits additional study as a strategy to address the excess burden of disease in older adults.

Delays in diagnosis and melanoma prognosis (II): the role of doctors

A prospective survey was conducted to assess physician responsibility in melanoma prognosis. Consecutive patients with primary melanoma were interviewed and examined using a standardized questionnaire. Main outcome measures were medical components of the delay before tumor resection and tumor thickness. Of 590 melanomas, 29.1% were coincidentally detected by physicians and their tumor depth was lower than in melanomas detected by patients (p < 0.001). Physician sensitivity for melanoma diagnosis was evaluated at 86%. Median time intervals to propose resection and to perform removal of melanoma were short: 0 (mean 103) and 7 (mean 68) days, respectively. Melanomas were managed in an inappropriate way in 14.2% of cases. Location on acral areas and absence of pigmentation were associated with longer medical delays and more frequent inappropriate medical attitudes. Melanomas located on hardly visible areas were less frequently detected by physicians than those on visible areas. Medical delays were shorter, doctor's attitude was more frequently appropriate, and melanoma thickness was lower (p < 0.001) when the patient visited a dermatologist (54.7%) than when he or she visited a general practitioner (33.4%). Our study shows that doctor responsibility accounts for only a small part of the total delay before melanoma removal. However, systematic total examination and better training of doctors, especially about unusual forms of melanoma, could still improve melanoma detection.

Skin cancer screening by Australian family physicians: variation with physician beliefs and geographic locality

INTRODUCTION

Australian national policies do not recommend skin cancer screening. We measured family physicians' beliefs, self-reported practices, and predictors of using clinical skin examination for skin cancer screening.

METHOD

Random self-administered postal survey of 1271 Australian family physicians (FPs) performed during 1996, obtaining 855 completed questionnaires (67% response rate).

RESULTS

Eighty-six percent of FPs surveyed indicated that they thought clinical skin examination was effective in reducing premature death from skin cancer; 72% indicated that they should be performed annually; and 60% indicated that all adults should be screened. Only 3% indicated correctly that screening has not been tested to determine its effectiveness. Although most FPs were unlikely to adopt an opportunistic approach to screening, 64% indicated that they would recommend clinical skin examination during a health check-up. FPs in northern (high incidence) latitudes were 3 to 4 times more likely to adopt opportunistic screening, and twice as likely to discuss clinical skin examination in a dedicated check-up. FPs were more likely to advocate screening in male rather than female patients. Half of respondents were unaware of relevant guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Although Australian policies do not recommend clinical skin examination because of insufficient evidence as yet of effectiveness, FPs show considerable support for screening. Geographic location, patient gender, and physician beliefs predict the self-reported provision of clinical skin examination by family physicians, suggesting that factors other than published guidelines affect clinical practice.

Strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice: are guidelines the answer?

BACKGROUND

GPs are ideally placed to recommend appropriate cancer screening for their patients. However, opportunities to discuss screening are often missed and screening procedures are not always recommended in accordance with national policy. The development of clinical practice guidelines represents one strategy for improving cancer screening in general practice.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to ascertain Australian GPs' ratings of current clinical practice guidelines and their views of the likely usefulness of 18 strategies to improve cancer screening in general practice.

METHOD

A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to a national random sample of 1271 GPs in May 1996. Responders rated the usefulness of each of eight clinical practice guidelines current at the time of the survey. They then rated the usefulness of each of 18 strategies for support of cancer screening.

RESULTS

We received 855 completed questionnaires (a 67% response rate). There was greatest support for guidelines already available on breast and cervical cancer. The most popular strategy to improve cancer screening was seminars with experts in preventive care, rated as 'very useful' by 658 (77%), followed by NHMRC guidelines (597, 70%) and pamphlets for patients (587, 69%). There was less support for more innovative strategies including assessment and feedback (35%), case finding by nurse practitioners (11%) and academic detailing (10%).

CONCLUSION

Responders indicated that strategies involving passive dissemination of information would be most useful for improving cancer screening in general practice. Identification of an effective combination of acceptable initiatives is needed.