Data Trends 2025: Dermatology

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 15:36
Display Headline
Data Trends 2025: Dermatology

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Rezaei SJ, et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2024;160(10):1107-1111. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol. 2024.3043 
  2. Singal A, Lipner SR. Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2267425. doi:10.1080/07853890.2023.2267425 
  3. Reese R, et al. J Dermatolog Treat. 2024;35(1):2402912. doi:10.1080/09546634.2024.2402912 
  4. Wallace MM, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(5):1411-1417. doi:10.1089/tmj.2022.0528 
  5. Russell A, et al. Mil Med. 2024;189(11-12):e2374-e2381. doi:10.1093/milmed/usae139 
  6. Salahuddin T, et al. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37(7):e862-e864. doi:10.1111/jdv.18964 

     

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Brett Sloan, MD, Professor of Dermatology, University of Connecticut School of Medicine; Residency Program Director, Department of Dermatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut. Brett Sloan, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs Received income in an amount equal to or greater than $250 from: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs.

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Brett Sloan, MD, Professor of Dermatology, University of Connecticut School of Medicine; Residency Program Director, Department of Dermatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut. Brett Sloan, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs Received income in an amount equal to or greater than $250 from: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs.

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Brett Sloan, MD, Professor of Dermatology, University of Connecticut School of Medicine; Residency Program Director, Department of Dermatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut. Brett Sloan, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs Received income in an amount equal to or greater than $250 from: University of Connecticut; Department of Veterans Affairs.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Rezaei SJ, et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2024;160(10):1107-1111. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol. 2024.3043 
  2. Singal A, Lipner SR. Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2267425. doi:10.1080/07853890.2023.2267425 
  3. Reese R, et al. J Dermatolog Treat. 2024;35(1):2402912. doi:10.1080/09546634.2024.2402912 
  4. Wallace MM, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(5):1411-1417. doi:10.1089/tmj.2022.0528 
  5. Russell A, et al. Mil Med. 2024;189(11-12):e2374-e2381. doi:10.1093/milmed/usae139 
  6. Salahuddin T, et al. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37(7):e862-e864. doi:10.1111/jdv.18964 

     

References
  1. Rezaei SJ, et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2024;160(10):1107-1111. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol. 2024.3043 
  2. Singal A, Lipner SR. Ann Med. 2023;55(2):2267425. doi:10.1080/07853890.2023.2267425 
  3. Reese R, et al. J Dermatolog Treat. 2024;35(1):2402912. doi:10.1080/09546634.2024.2402912 
  4. Wallace MM, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(5):1411-1417. doi:10.1089/tmj.2022.0528 
  5. Russell A, et al. Mil Med. 2024;189(11-12):e2374-e2381. doi:10.1093/milmed/usae139 
  6. Salahuddin T, et al. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37(7):e862-e864. doi:10.1111/jdv.18964 

     

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Data Trends 2025: Dermatology
Display Headline
Data Trends 2025: Dermatology
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:58
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:58
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:58
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Article Slideshow Optional Introduction

Service members experience unique risk factors for dermatologic conditions, such as increased sun exposure, crowded living conditions, environmental contaminants, skin injury, and extreme temperatures.1,2 Veterans have an estimated 72% higher risk for any skin cancer compared to civilians, and are also at an increased risk of psoriasis, a chronic immune-mediated skin condition.1,3 Dermatitis and eczema are also common conditions in military personnel, accounting for 17.0%-38.7% of skin diagnoses during military missions in Lebanon, Iraq, and Sudan.2

Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:58
Slide Media

Data Trends 2025: Neurology

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 16:41
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Neurology

References
  1. Lin C, et al. Front Neurol. 2024;15:1392721. Published 2024 Mar 12. doi:10.3389/fneur.2024.1392721
  2. Defense Medical Surveillance System, Theater Medical Data Store provided by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Prepared by the Traumatic Brain Injury Center of Excellence. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Centers-of-Excellence/Traumatic-Brain-Injury-Center-of-Excellence/DODTBI-Worldwide-Numbers
  3. Karr JE, et al. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2025;106(4):537-547. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.11.010
  4. Howard JT, et al. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2025;12(3):1745-1756. doi:10.1007/s40615-024-02004-1
  5. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  6. Roghani A, et al. Epilepsia. 2024;65(8):2255-2269. doi:10.1111/epi.18026
  7. Herbert MS, et al. Headache. 2025;65(3):430-438. doi:10.1111/head.14815
  8. Fleming NH, et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2024;82:105372. doi:10.1016/j.msard.2023.105372
  9. Silveira SL, et al. CNS Spectr. 2024;29(6):1-8. doi:10.1017/S1092852924002165
  10. Whiteneck G, et al. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2024;39(5):E462-E469. doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000952
  11. Seng EK, et al. Headache. 2024;64(10):1273-1284. doi:10.1111/head.14842

     

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Carl Robinson, MD, Chief of Neurology, Togus VA Medical Center, Augusta, Maine
Dr. Robinson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Carl Robinson, MD, Chief of Neurology, Togus VA Medical Center, Augusta, Maine
Dr. Robinson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Carl Robinson, MD, Chief of Neurology, Togus VA Medical Center, Augusta, Maine
Dr. Robinson has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

References
  1. Lin C, et al. Front Neurol. 2024;15:1392721. Published 2024 Mar 12. doi:10.3389/fneur.2024.1392721
  2. Defense Medical Surveillance System, Theater Medical Data Store provided by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Prepared by the Traumatic Brain Injury Center of Excellence. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Centers-of-Excellence/Traumatic-Brain-Injury-Center-of-Excellence/DODTBI-Worldwide-Numbers
  3. Karr JE, et al. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2025;106(4):537-547. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.11.010
  4. Howard JT, et al. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2025;12(3):1745-1756. doi:10.1007/s40615-024-02004-1
  5. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  6. Roghani A, et al. Epilepsia. 2024;65(8):2255-2269. doi:10.1111/epi.18026
  7. Herbert MS, et al. Headache. 2025;65(3):430-438. doi:10.1111/head.14815
  8. Fleming NH, et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2024;82:105372. doi:10.1016/j.msard.2023.105372
  9. Silveira SL, et al. CNS Spectr. 2024;29(6):1-8. doi:10.1017/S1092852924002165
  10. Whiteneck G, et al. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2024;39(5):E462-E469. doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000952
  11. Seng EK, et al. Headache. 2024;64(10):1273-1284. doi:10.1111/head.14842

     

References
  1. Lin C, et al. Front Neurol. 2024;15:1392721. Published 2024 Mar 12. doi:10.3389/fneur.2024.1392721
  2. Defense Medical Surveillance System, Theater Medical Data Store provided by the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division. Prepared by the Traumatic Brain Injury Center of Excellence. Accessed April 2, 2025. https://health.mil/Military-Health-Topics/Centers-of-Excellence/Traumatic-Brain-Injury-Center-of-Excellence/DODTBI-Worldwide-Numbers
  3. Karr JE, et al. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2025;106(4):537-547. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2024.11.010
  4. Howard JT, et al. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2025;12(3):1745-1756. doi:10.1007/s40615-024-02004-1
  5. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  6. Roghani A, et al. Epilepsia. 2024;65(8):2255-2269. doi:10.1111/epi.18026
  7. Herbert MS, et al. Headache. 2025;65(3):430-438. doi:10.1111/head.14815
  8. Fleming NH, et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2024;82:105372. doi:10.1016/j.msard.2023.105372
  9. Silveira SL, et al. CNS Spectr. 2024;29(6):1-8. doi:10.1017/S1092852924002165
  10. Whiteneck G, et al. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2024;39(5):E462-E469. doi:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000952
  11. Seng EK, et al. Headache. 2024;64(10):1273-1284. doi:10.1111/head.14842

     

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Neurology

Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Neurology

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:58
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:58
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:58
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Article Slideshow Optional Introduction

Active-duty military personnel and veterans experience unique neurologic morbidity compared to the general population.1 Over 500,000 service members have been diagnosed with TBI from 2000-2024.2 Many of these veterans have mental and physical health comorbidities, and up to 84% higher risk of all-cause mortality.3,4 TBI is associated with other neurological conditions, such as posttraumatic headaches, migraines, and epilepsy.5,6 In a large cohort study, migraine prevalence was found to be approximately 10%, with prevalence as high as 30% in women veterans.5 Migraine and TBI co-occur in 2.3% of veterans, exacerbating cognitive dysfunction more than either condition alone.7 Veterans with multiple sclerosis (MS) face higher risks of dementia, depression, and cannabis use disorder, with mental health risks being amplified by younger age, minority status, combat exposure, and disability.8,9

Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:58
Slide Media

Data Trends 2025: Women's Health

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 15:35
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Women's Health

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Women Veterans Health Care: Facts and Statistics. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Published 2022. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/facts-and-statistics.asp
  2. Sourcebook: Women Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration. Volume 5: Longitudinal Trends in Sociodemographics and Utilization, Including Type, Modality, and Source of Care. US Department of Veterans Affairs; 2024. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/WOMENSHEALTH/docs/VHA-Source-book-V5-FINAL.pdf
  3. Goldstein KM, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(4):e256372. doi:10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2025.6372
  4. Sheahan KL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(Suppl 3):791-798. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07585-3
  5. Adams RE, et al. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):1-10. doi:10.1186/s12905-021-01183-z
  6. Haskell SG, et al. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(2):267-271. doi:10.1089/jwh.2008.1262
  7. VHA Directive 1330.01(1): Health Care Services for Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs; February 15, 2023. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=10576
  8. VHA Directive 1115(1): Military Sexual Trauma (MST) Program. US Department of Veterans Affairs; May 8, 2018. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=6432
  9. Marshall V, et al. Womens Health Issues. 2021;31(2):150-157. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2020.10.005
  10. Washington DL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(suppl 2):655-661. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1772-z
  11. Hadlandsmyth K, et al. Eur J Pain. 2024;28(8):1311-1319. doi:10.1002/ejp.2258
  12. Military Sexual Trauma Fact Sheet–VA Mental Health. US Department of Veterans Affairs. May 1, 2021. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/docs/mst_general_factsheet.pdf
  13. National Center for Veterans Analysis and Statistics. Population Tables: the nation, age/sex. US Department of Veterans Affairs website. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vetdata/Veteran_Population.asp
  14. Serving Her Country: Exploring the Characteristics of Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.data.va.gov/stories/s/Women-Veterans-in-2023/wci3-yrsv/
  15. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  16. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Study of Barriers for Women Veterans to VA Health Care: Final Report. February 2024. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/publications-and-reports.asp
  17. Iverson KM, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(11):2435-2442. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05240-y
  18. Spinelli S, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(suppl 3):837-841. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07577-3
  19. Carlson K, et al. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Updated January 22,2025. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519070/
  20. Monteith LL, et al. J Interpers Violence. 2023;38(11-12):7578-7601. doi:10.1177/08862605221145725

     

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, Staff Psychologist, Department of Psychology Service, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut; Associate Research Scientist, Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relations:hips.

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, Staff Psychologist, Department of Psychology Service, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut; Associate Research Scientist, Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relations:hips.

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, Staff Psychologist, Department of Psychology Service, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut; Associate Research Scientist, Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. Aliya R. Webermann, PhD, has disclosed no relevant financial relations:hips.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Women Veterans Health Care: Facts and Statistics. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Published 2022. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/facts-and-statistics.asp
  2. Sourcebook: Women Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration. Volume 5: Longitudinal Trends in Sociodemographics and Utilization, Including Type, Modality, and Source of Care. US Department of Veterans Affairs; 2024. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/WOMENSHEALTH/docs/VHA-Source-book-V5-FINAL.pdf
  3. Goldstein KM, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(4):e256372. doi:10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2025.6372
  4. Sheahan KL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(Suppl 3):791-798. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07585-3
  5. Adams RE, et al. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):1-10. doi:10.1186/s12905-021-01183-z
  6. Haskell SG, et al. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(2):267-271. doi:10.1089/jwh.2008.1262
  7. VHA Directive 1330.01(1): Health Care Services for Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs; February 15, 2023. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=10576
  8. VHA Directive 1115(1): Military Sexual Trauma (MST) Program. US Department of Veterans Affairs; May 8, 2018. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=6432
  9. Marshall V, et al. Womens Health Issues. 2021;31(2):150-157. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2020.10.005
  10. Washington DL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(suppl 2):655-661. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1772-z
  11. Hadlandsmyth K, et al. Eur J Pain. 2024;28(8):1311-1319. doi:10.1002/ejp.2258
  12. Military Sexual Trauma Fact Sheet–VA Mental Health. US Department of Veterans Affairs. May 1, 2021. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/docs/mst_general_factsheet.pdf
  13. National Center for Veterans Analysis and Statistics. Population Tables: the nation, age/sex. US Department of Veterans Affairs website. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vetdata/Veteran_Population.asp
  14. Serving Her Country: Exploring the Characteristics of Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.data.va.gov/stories/s/Women-Veterans-in-2023/wci3-yrsv/
  15. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  16. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Study of Barriers for Women Veterans to VA Health Care: Final Report. February 2024. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/publications-and-reports.asp
  17. Iverson KM, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(11):2435-2442. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05240-y
  18. Spinelli S, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(suppl 3):837-841. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07577-3
  19. Carlson K, et al. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Updated January 22,2025. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519070/
  20. Monteith LL, et al. J Interpers Violence. 2023;38(11-12):7578-7601. doi:10.1177/08862605221145725

     

References
  1. Women Veterans Health Care: Facts and Statistics. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Published 2022. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/facts-and-statistics.asp
  2. Sourcebook: Women Veterans in the Veterans Health Administration. Volume 5: Longitudinal Trends in Sociodemographics and Utilization, Including Type, Modality, and Source of Care. US Department of Veterans Affairs; 2024. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/WOMENSHEALTH/docs/VHA-Source-book-V5-FINAL.pdf
  3. Goldstein KM, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2025;8(4):e256372. doi:10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2025.6372
  4. Sheahan KL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(Suppl 3):791-798. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07585-3
  5. Adams RE, et al. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):1-10. doi:10.1186/s12905-021-01183-z
  6. Haskell SG, et al. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19(2):267-271. doi:10.1089/jwh.2008.1262
  7. VHA Directive 1330.01(1): Health Care Services for Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs; February 15, 2023. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=10576
  8. VHA Directive 1115(1): Military Sexual Trauma (MST) Program. US Department of Veterans Affairs; May 8, 2018. Accessed May 23, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=6432
  9. Marshall V, et al. Womens Health Issues. 2021;31(2):150-157. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2020.10.005
  10. Washington DL, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2011;26(suppl 2):655-661. doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1772-z
  11. Hadlandsmyth K, et al. Eur J Pain. 2024;28(8):1311-1319. doi:10.1002/ejp.2258
  12. Military Sexual Trauma Fact Sheet–VA Mental Health. US Department of Veterans Affairs. May 1, 2021. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/docs/mst_general_factsheet.pdf
  13. National Center for Veterans Analysis and Statistics. Population Tables: the nation, age/sex. US Department of Veterans Affairs website. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.va.gov/vetdata/Veteran_Population.asp
  14. Serving Her Country: Exploring the Characteristics of Women Veterans. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.data.va.gov/stories/s/Women-Veterans-in-2023/wci3-yrsv/
  15. Gasperi M, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e242299. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.2299
  16. US Department of Veterans Affairs. Study of Barriers for Women Veterans to VA Health Care: Final Report. February 2024. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.womenshealth.va.gov/materials-and-resources/publications-and-reports.asp
  17. Iverson KM, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2019;34(11):2435-2442. doi:10.1007/s11606-019-05240-y
  18. Spinelli S, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37(suppl 3):837-841. doi:10.1007/s11606-022-07577-3
  19. Carlson K, et al. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Updated January 22,2025. Accessed March 21, 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519070/
  20. Monteith LL, et al. J Interpers Violence. 2023;38(11-12):7578-7601. doi:10.1177/08862605221145725

     

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Women's Health

Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Women's Health

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 12:19
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 12:19
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 12:19
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Article Slideshow Optional Introduction

Women, the fastest-growing veteran subpopulation, represent over 10% of US veterans and are projected to reach 18% by 2040.1 Currently, 28% of women veterans use VHA services, with 44% receiving VHA-funded community care.2 While 86% of VHA women veterans are under 65, the population is aging.3,4 Compared to male veterans, women experience higher rates of depression, anxiety, military sexual trauma (MST), musculoskeletal conditions, chronic pain, and PTSD—though evidence on sex differences in PTSD is mixed.5,6 Women veterans also face pregnancy-related challenges, including childcare barriers, difficulty discontinuing pain medications, poor VHA-obstetric coordination, and higher perinatal mortality. In 2010, VHA Directive 1330 established standards for women’s healthcare, including designated women’s health providers.7 In 2018, Directive 1115 outlined MST-related care, screening, and free treatment.8 Despite progress in women’s healthcare and a greater sense of welcome at VHA, gaps persist in provider availability, community care coordination, and harassment within facilities.9 Women veterans also report barriers such as lack of insurance, unaffordable care, transportation issues, and inability to take time off work.10

Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 12:19
Slide Media

Data Trends 2025: Diabetes

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 15:35
Display Headline

Diabetes

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References

1. US Department of Veterans Affairs. VA improving diabetes care with patient generated health data. VA News. March 12, 2025. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://news.va.gov/138644/va-diabetes-care-with-patient-generated-data/
2. Diabetes basics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. May 15, 2024. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/about/index.html
3. Hua S, et al. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(11):1978-1984. doi:10.2337/dc24-0892
4. Lipska KJ, et al. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26(12):908-917. doi:10.1089/dia.2024.0152
5. Yoon J, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2025;40(3):647-653. doi:10.1007/s11606-024-08968-4

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References

1. US Department of Veterans Affairs. VA improving diabetes care with patient generated health data. VA News. March 12, 2025. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://news.va.gov/138644/va-diabetes-care-with-patient-generated-data/
2. Diabetes basics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. May 15, 2024. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/about/index.html
3. Hua S, et al. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(11):1978-1984. doi:10.2337/dc24-0892
4. Lipska KJ, et al. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26(12):908-917. doi:10.1089/dia.2024.0152
5. Yoon J, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2025;40(3):647-653. doi:10.1007/s11606-024-08968-4

References

1. US Department of Veterans Affairs. VA improving diabetes care with patient generated health data. VA News. March 12, 2025. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://news.va.gov/138644/va-diabetes-care-with-patient-generated-data/
2. Diabetes basics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. May 15, 2024. Accessed April 24, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/about/index.html
3. Hua S, et al. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(11):1978-1984. doi:10.2337/dc24-0892
4. Lipska KJ, et al. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26(12):908-917. doi:10.1089/dia.2024.0152
5. Yoon J, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2025;40(3):647-653. doi:10.1007/s11606-024-08968-4

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Diabetes

Display Headline

Diabetes

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 10:55
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 10:55
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 10:55
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Article Slideshow Optional Introduction

Nearly 25% of veterans who receive VA care have diabetes, compared with about 10% of the US population.1,2 Within the VA, diabetes is the leading cause of long-term complications such as blindness, kidney failure, and amputation.1

Over the past decade, racial and ethnic disparities in early glycemic control have narrowed within the veteran, but differences in continuous glucose monitor (CGM) prescriptions remain.3,4

The quality of diabetes management also varies depending on where veterans receive their care. A recent study showed that veterans seeking care in community settings had lower rates of diabetes testing and immunizations, fewer primary care visits, higher rates of hospitalization, and higher health care costs compared with veterans who were treated directly within the VA.5

Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Thu, 07/10/2025 - 10:55
Slide Media

Data Trends 2025: Cardiology

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 15:35
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Cardiology

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Almuwaqqat Z, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e243062. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.3062
  2. Carrico M, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(4):1006-1012. doi:10.1089/tmj.2023.0269
  3. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. National veteran health equity report 2021. September 2022:177-179. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/NVHER_2021_Report_508_Conformant.pdf
  4. New program for veterans with cholesterol, associated cardiovascular disease [press release]. American Heart Association. March 21, 2023. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/new-program-for-veterans-with-high-cholesterol-associated-cardiovascular-disease                                               
  5. Washington DL, et al. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. February 2024. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/Rates_of_Hypertension_by_Race_or_Ethnicity.pdf

     

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by:

Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Endocrinology Institute, Lerner College of Medicine of CWRU; Endocrinology fellowship director, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio. Ricardo Correa, MD, EdD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships: Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: American association of clinical endocrinologist; Endocrine fellow foundation; Intealth (ECFMG).

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References
  1. Almuwaqqat Z, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e243062. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.3062
  2. Carrico M, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(4):1006-1012. doi:10.1089/tmj.2023.0269
  3. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. National veteran health equity report 2021. September 2022:177-179. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/NVHER_2021_Report_508_Conformant.pdf
  4. New program for veterans with cholesterol, associated cardiovascular disease [press release]. American Heart Association. March 21, 2023. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/new-program-for-veterans-with-high-cholesterol-associated-cardiovascular-disease                                               
  5. Washington DL, et al. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. February 2024. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/Rates_of_Hypertension_by_Race_or_Ethnicity.pdf

     

References
  1. Almuwaqqat Z, et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e243062. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.3062
  2. Carrico M, et al. Telemed J E Health. 2024;30(4):1006-1012. doi:10.1089/tmj.2023.0269
  3. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. National veteran health equity report 2021. September 2022:177-179. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/NVHER_2021_Report_508_Conformant.pdf
  4. New program for veterans with cholesterol, associated cardiovascular disease [press release]. American Heart Association. March 21, 2023. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/new-program-for-veterans-with-high-cholesterol-associated-cardiovascular-disease                                               
  5. Washington DL, et al. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Health Equity. February 2024. Accessed April 11, 2025. https://www.va.gov/HEALTHEQUITY/docs/Rates_of_Hypertension_by_Race_or_Ethnicity.pdf

     

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Cardiology

Display Headline

Data Trends 2025: Cardiology

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Wed, 07/09/2025 - 11:42
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 07/09/2025 - 11:42
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 07/09/2025 - 11:42
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Article Slideshow Optional Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD), a leading cause of morbidity in this population, has driven the VHA to focus increasingly on prevention, risk reduction, and more effective management strategies.To address hypertension (HTN)—the most common chronic condition among veterans—the VHA has implemented nurse-led telehealth initiatives, including video blood pressure visits (VBPVs), since 2018.These virtual visits support accurate blood pressure (BP) monitoring, patient education, and medication adherence, helping to expand access and improve outcomes.2

Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Wed, 07/09/2025 - 11:42
Slide Media

Data Trends 2025: Veteran Health at a Glance

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 15:35
Display Headline

Veteran Health at a Glance

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References

1. United States Census Bureau. Veterans Day 2024: November 11 [press release]. October 16, 2024. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/
facts-for-features/2024/veterans-day.html
2. American Community Survey, 2023: ACS 1-year estimates subject tables:S2101 veteran status. United States Census Bureau. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://data.
census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S2101
3. Vespa J, Carter C. Trends in veteran disability status and service-connected disability: 2008-2022. ACS-58. United States Census Bureau. November 6, 2024. Accessed
April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2024/acs/acs-58.html
4. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2024. Accessed June 9, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2024-abr.pdf
5. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2023-abr.pdf
6. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2022. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2022-abr.pdf
7. Vespa J. Aging veterans: America’s veteran population in later life. ACS-54. United States Census Bureau. July 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/
content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/acs/acs-54.pdf
8. A profile of older US veterans. National Council on Aging. November 6, 2019. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.ncoa.org/article/a-profile-of-older-us-veterans/
 

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Kayla M. Williams, MA, Adjunct Senior Policy Researcher, Veterans Policy Research Institute, RAND Corporation, Reston, Virginia.
Kayla M. Williams, MA, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Publications
Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Kayla M. Williams, MA, Adjunct Senior Policy Researcher, Veterans Policy Research Institute, RAND Corporation, Reston, Virginia.
Kayla M. Williams, MA, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Author and Disclosure Information

Reviewed by: Kayla M. Williams, MA, Adjunct Senior Policy Researcher, Veterans Policy Research Institute, RAND Corporation, Reston, Virginia.
Kayla M. Williams, MA, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

Click here to view more from Federal Health Care Data Trends 2025.

References

1. United States Census Bureau. Veterans Day 2024: November 11 [press release]. October 16, 2024. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/
facts-for-features/2024/veterans-day.html
2. American Community Survey, 2023: ACS 1-year estimates subject tables:S2101 veteran status. United States Census Bureau. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://data.
census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S2101
3. Vespa J, Carter C. Trends in veteran disability status and service-connected disability: 2008-2022. ACS-58. United States Census Bureau. November 6, 2024. Accessed
April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2024/acs/acs-58.html
4. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2024. Accessed June 9, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2024-abr.pdf
5. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2023-abr.pdf
6. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2022. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2022-abr.pdf
7. Vespa J. Aging veterans: America’s veteran population in later life. ACS-54. United States Census Bureau. July 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/
content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/acs/acs-54.pdf
8. A profile of older US veterans. National Council on Aging. November 6, 2019. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.ncoa.org/article/a-profile-of-older-us-veterans/
 

References

1. United States Census Bureau. Veterans Day 2024: November 11 [press release]. October 16, 2024. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/
facts-for-features/2024/veterans-day.html
2. American Community Survey, 2023: ACS 1-year estimates subject tables:S2101 veteran status. United States Census Bureau. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://data.
census.gov/table/ACSST1Y2023.S2101
3. Vespa J, Carter C. Trends in veteran disability status and service-connected disability: 2008-2022. ACS-58. United States Census Bureau. November 6, 2024. Accessed
April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2024/acs/acs-58.html
4. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2024. Accessed June 9, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2024-abr.pdf
5. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2023-abr.pdf
6. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration. Annual benefits report fiscal year 2022. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.benefits.va.gov/
REPORTS/abr/docs/2022-abr.pdf
7. Vespa J. Aging veterans: America’s veteran population in later life. ACS-54. United States Census Bureau. July 2023. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.census.gov/
content/dam/Census/library/publications/2023/acs/acs-54.pdf
8. A profile of older US veterans. National Council on Aging. November 6, 2019. Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.ncoa.org/article/a-profile-of-older-us-veterans/
 

Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline

Veteran Health at a Glance

Display Headline

Veteran Health at a Glance

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Eyebrow Default
SLIDESHOW
Gate On Date
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 09:11
Un-Gate On Date
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 09:11
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 09:11
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 09:11
Slide Media

Atypical Skin Bronzing in Response to Belumosudil for Graft-vs-Host Disease

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/18/2025 - 13:42
Display Headline

Atypical Skin Bronzing in Response to Belumosudil for Graft-vs-Host Disease

To the Editor:

Drug-induced hyperpigmentation is a common cause of an acquired increase in pigmentation. Belumosudil is an oral selective inhibitor of Rho-associated coiled-coil containing protein kinase (ROCK2) that is approved for the treatment of chronic graft-vs-host disease (GVHD). We describe a patient who developed diffuse skin bronzing 3 weeks after initiation of belumosudil treatment.

A 64-year-old fair-skinned woman presented to the dermatology clinic with bronzing of the skin and dystrophic nails 3 weeks after starting belumosudil for treatment of chronic GVHD. Six months prior to presentation, the patient had received a bone marrow transplant for chronic lymphoid leukemia. She presented to dermatology 6 months after the transplant with a new-onset rash that was suspicious for GVHD. Physical examination revealed pruritic pink papules diffusely scattered on the legs and forearms (Figure 1). The patient declined biopsy at that time and later followed up with oncology. The patient’s oncologist supported a diagnosis of GVHD, and the patient began treatment with belumosudil 200 mg/d which was intended to be taken until treatment failure due to progression of chronic GVHD.

FIGURE 1. Smooth pink papules diffusely scattered on the left forearm that were suspicious for graft-vs-host disease.

Three weeks after starting belumosudil, the patient developed diffuse bronzing of the skin and brown, evenly colored patches scattered on the trunk, back, and upper and lower extremities on a background of the presumed GVHD rash (Figure 2). The hyperpigmentation was abrupt, starting on the chest and spreading to the abdomen, extremities, and back (Figure 3).

FIGURE 2. Brown, evenly colored patches and diffuse skin bronzing over the left forearm 3 weeks after treatment with belumosudil for graft-vs-host disease.
FIGURE 3. A, The patient’s chest prior to starting belumosudil treatment. B and C, Diffuse bronzing and hyperpigmentation
developed on the patient’s chest and back within 3 weeks of initiating treatment with belumosudil.

Again, the patient was offered biopsy for the new-onset pigmentation but declined. During this time, she had no notable sun exposure and primarily stayed indoors despite living in a region with a sunny semi-arid climate. Her medication and supplement list were reviewed and included acalabrutinib, a multivitamin, lutein, biotin, and a fish oil supplement. A compete blood cell count as well as ferritin, transferrin, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone levels were unremarkable.

The patient continued to take belumosudil for treatment of GVHD. The hyperpigmentation faded slightly by a 2-month follow-up visit but persisted and was stable. She has not tried other treatments for GVHD to manage the hyperpigmentation.

Conditions known to cause diffuse bronzing of the skin include Addison disease, hemochromatosis, Cushing disease, and medication adverse events. Our patient presented with an absence of systemic symptoms, normal laboratory results, and no clinical indicators suggesting alternate causes. Given that the onset of the hyperpigmentation was 3 weeks after she started a new medication, we hypothesized that the bronzing was an adverse effect of the belumosudil—though this correlation cannot be definitively proven by this case.

The most common offending agents for drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation are nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs, antimalarials, amiodarone, cytotoxic drugs, and tetracyclines.1,2 Our patient’s medication list included the cytotoxic agent acalabrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It has been associated with dermatologic findings of ecchymosis, bruising, panniculitis, and cellulitis, but there are no known reports of hyperpigmentation.3 Our patient had been taking acalabrutinib for 6 months when the GVHD rash developed. At the time, she also was taking a multivitamin and lutein, biotin, and fish oil supplements, none of which have been associated with hyperpigmentation.

Polypharmacy adds a layer of difficulty in identifying the inciting cause of pigmentary change. In our case, symptoms began 3 weeks after the initiation of belumosudil. There were no cutaneous reactions observed in the ROCKstar study of belumosudil; the most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection, diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, increased liver enzymes, and dyspnea.4,5 Patients on belumosudil have developed aggressive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.6 However, a search of PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms acalabrutinib or belumosudil with hyperpigmentation or cutaneous reaction returned no reports of these medications causing hyperpigmentation or cutaneous deposits.

Treatment of drug-induced hyperpigmentation is difficult because discontinuation of the offending agent typically confirms diagnosis, but interruption of treatment is not always possible, as in our patient. The skin changes can fade over time, but effects typically are long lasting.

Dermatologists play a key role in the identification of drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation. After endocrine or metabolic causes of skin hyperpigmentation have been ruled out, a thorough review of the patient’s medication list should be done to assess for a drug-induced cause. Treatment is limited to sun avoidance, as interruption of treatment may not be possible, and lesions typically do fade over time. These chronic skin changes can have a psychosocial effect on patients and regular follow-up is recommended.

References
  1. Giménez García RM, Carrasco Molina S. Drug-induced hyperpigmentation: review and case series. J Am Board Fam Med. 2019;32:628-638. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2019.04.180212
  2. Dereure O. Drug-induced skin pigmentation. epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2001;2:253-62. doi:10.2165/00128071-200102040-00006
  3. Sibaud V, Beylot-Barry M, Protin C, et al. Dermatological toxicities of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020; 21:799-812. doi:10.1007/s40257-020-00535-x
  4. Cutler C, Lee SJ, Arai S, et al. Belumosudil for chronic graft-versus-host disease after 2 or more prior lines of therapy: the ROCKstar Study. Blood. 2021;138:2278-2289. doi:10.1182/blood.2021012021
  5. Jagasia M, Lazaryan A, Bachier CR, et al. ROCK2 inhibition with belumosudil (KD025) for the treatment of chronic graftversus- host disease. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1888-1898. doi:10.1200 /JCO.20.02754
  6. Lee GH, Guzman AK, Divito SJ, et al. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma after treatment with ruxolitinib or belumosudil. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:188-190. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2304157
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Cheng is from the College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, California. Dr. Pham is from Sand Dermatology, Chino Hills, California.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Melissa Cheng, DO, Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, 309 E Second St, Pomona, CA 91766 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 July;116(1):E5-E7. doi:10.12788/cutis.1250

Issue
Cutis - 116(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E5-E7
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Cheng is from the College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, California. Dr. Pham is from Sand Dermatology, Chino Hills, California.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Melissa Cheng, DO, Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, 309 E Second St, Pomona, CA 91766 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 July;116(1):E5-E7. doi:10.12788/cutis.1250

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Cheng is from the College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, California. Dr. Pham is from Sand Dermatology, Chino Hills, California.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Melissa Cheng, DO, Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, 309 E Second St, Pomona, CA 91766 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 July;116(1):E5-E7. doi:10.12788/cutis.1250

Article PDF
Article PDF

To the Editor:

Drug-induced hyperpigmentation is a common cause of an acquired increase in pigmentation. Belumosudil is an oral selective inhibitor of Rho-associated coiled-coil containing protein kinase (ROCK2) that is approved for the treatment of chronic graft-vs-host disease (GVHD). We describe a patient who developed diffuse skin bronzing 3 weeks after initiation of belumosudil treatment.

A 64-year-old fair-skinned woman presented to the dermatology clinic with bronzing of the skin and dystrophic nails 3 weeks after starting belumosudil for treatment of chronic GVHD. Six months prior to presentation, the patient had received a bone marrow transplant for chronic lymphoid leukemia. She presented to dermatology 6 months after the transplant with a new-onset rash that was suspicious for GVHD. Physical examination revealed pruritic pink papules diffusely scattered on the legs and forearms (Figure 1). The patient declined biopsy at that time and later followed up with oncology. The patient’s oncologist supported a diagnosis of GVHD, and the patient began treatment with belumosudil 200 mg/d which was intended to be taken until treatment failure due to progression of chronic GVHD.

FIGURE 1. Smooth pink papules diffusely scattered on the left forearm that were suspicious for graft-vs-host disease.

Three weeks after starting belumosudil, the patient developed diffuse bronzing of the skin and brown, evenly colored patches scattered on the trunk, back, and upper and lower extremities on a background of the presumed GVHD rash (Figure 2). The hyperpigmentation was abrupt, starting on the chest and spreading to the abdomen, extremities, and back (Figure 3).

FIGURE 2. Brown, evenly colored patches and diffuse skin bronzing over the left forearm 3 weeks after treatment with belumosudil for graft-vs-host disease.
FIGURE 3. A, The patient’s chest prior to starting belumosudil treatment. B and C, Diffuse bronzing and hyperpigmentation
developed on the patient’s chest and back within 3 weeks of initiating treatment with belumosudil.

Again, the patient was offered biopsy for the new-onset pigmentation but declined. During this time, she had no notable sun exposure and primarily stayed indoors despite living in a region with a sunny semi-arid climate. Her medication and supplement list were reviewed and included acalabrutinib, a multivitamin, lutein, biotin, and a fish oil supplement. A compete blood cell count as well as ferritin, transferrin, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone levels were unremarkable.

The patient continued to take belumosudil for treatment of GVHD. The hyperpigmentation faded slightly by a 2-month follow-up visit but persisted and was stable. She has not tried other treatments for GVHD to manage the hyperpigmentation.

Conditions known to cause diffuse bronzing of the skin include Addison disease, hemochromatosis, Cushing disease, and medication adverse events. Our patient presented with an absence of systemic symptoms, normal laboratory results, and no clinical indicators suggesting alternate causes. Given that the onset of the hyperpigmentation was 3 weeks after she started a new medication, we hypothesized that the bronzing was an adverse effect of the belumosudil—though this correlation cannot be definitively proven by this case.

The most common offending agents for drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation are nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs, antimalarials, amiodarone, cytotoxic drugs, and tetracyclines.1,2 Our patient’s medication list included the cytotoxic agent acalabrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It has been associated with dermatologic findings of ecchymosis, bruising, panniculitis, and cellulitis, but there are no known reports of hyperpigmentation.3 Our patient had been taking acalabrutinib for 6 months when the GVHD rash developed. At the time, she also was taking a multivitamin and lutein, biotin, and fish oil supplements, none of which have been associated with hyperpigmentation.

Polypharmacy adds a layer of difficulty in identifying the inciting cause of pigmentary change. In our case, symptoms began 3 weeks after the initiation of belumosudil. There were no cutaneous reactions observed in the ROCKstar study of belumosudil; the most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection, diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, increased liver enzymes, and dyspnea.4,5 Patients on belumosudil have developed aggressive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.6 However, a search of PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms acalabrutinib or belumosudil with hyperpigmentation or cutaneous reaction returned no reports of these medications causing hyperpigmentation or cutaneous deposits.

Treatment of drug-induced hyperpigmentation is difficult because discontinuation of the offending agent typically confirms diagnosis, but interruption of treatment is not always possible, as in our patient. The skin changes can fade over time, but effects typically are long lasting.

Dermatologists play a key role in the identification of drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation. After endocrine or metabolic causes of skin hyperpigmentation have been ruled out, a thorough review of the patient’s medication list should be done to assess for a drug-induced cause. Treatment is limited to sun avoidance, as interruption of treatment may not be possible, and lesions typically do fade over time. These chronic skin changes can have a psychosocial effect on patients and regular follow-up is recommended.

To the Editor:

Drug-induced hyperpigmentation is a common cause of an acquired increase in pigmentation. Belumosudil is an oral selective inhibitor of Rho-associated coiled-coil containing protein kinase (ROCK2) that is approved for the treatment of chronic graft-vs-host disease (GVHD). We describe a patient who developed diffuse skin bronzing 3 weeks after initiation of belumosudil treatment.

A 64-year-old fair-skinned woman presented to the dermatology clinic with bronzing of the skin and dystrophic nails 3 weeks after starting belumosudil for treatment of chronic GVHD. Six months prior to presentation, the patient had received a bone marrow transplant for chronic lymphoid leukemia. She presented to dermatology 6 months after the transplant with a new-onset rash that was suspicious for GVHD. Physical examination revealed pruritic pink papules diffusely scattered on the legs and forearms (Figure 1). The patient declined biopsy at that time and later followed up with oncology. The patient’s oncologist supported a diagnosis of GVHD, and the patient began treatment with belumosudil 200 mg/d which was intended to be taken until treatment failure due to progression of chronic GVHD.

FIGURE 1. Smooth pink papules diffusely scattered on the left forearm that were suspicious for graft-vs-host disease.

Three weeks after starting belumosudil, the patient developed diffuse bronzing of the skin and brown, evenly colored patches scattered on the trunk, back, and upper and lower extremities on a background of the presumed GVHD rash (Figure 2). The hyperpigmentation was abrupt, starting on the chest and spreading to the abdomen, extremities, and back (Figure 3).

FIGURE 2. Brown, evenly colored patches and diffuse skin bronzing over the left forearm 3 weeks after treatment with belumosudil for graft-vs-host disease.
FIGURE 3. A, The patient’s chest prior to starting belumosudil treatment. B and C, Diffuse bronzing and hyperpigmentation
developed on the patient’s chest and back within 3 weeks of initiating treatment with belumosudil.

Again, the patient was offered biopsy for the new-onset pigmentation but declined. During this time, she had no notable sun exposure and primarily stayed indoors despite living in a region with a sunny semi-arid climate. Her medication and supplement list were reviewed and included acalabrutinib, a multivitamin, lutein, biotin, and a fish oil supplement. A compete blood cell count as well as ferritin, transferrin, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone levels were unremarkable.

The patient continued to take belumosudil for treatment of GVHD. The hyperpigmentation faded slightly by a 2-month follow-up visit but persisted and was stable. She has not tried other treatments for GVHD to manage the hyperpigmentation.

Conditions known to cause diffuse bronzing of the skin include Addison disease, hemochromatosis, Cushing disease, and medication adverse events. Our patient presented with an absence of systemic symptoms, normal laboratory results, and no clinical indicators suggesting alternate causes. Given that the onset of the hyperpigmentation was 3 weeks after she started a new medication, we hypothesized that the bronzing was an adverse effect of the belumosudil—though this correlation cannot be definitively proven by this case.

The most common offending agents for drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation are nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs, antimalarials, amiodarone, cytotoxic drugs, and tetracyclines.1,2 Our patient’s medication list included the cytotoxic agent acalabrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It has been associated with dermatologic findings of ecchymosis, bruising, panniculitis, and cellulitis, but there are no known reports of hyperpigmentation.3 Our patient had been taking acalabrutinib for 6 months when the GVHD rash developed. At the time, she also was taking a multivitamin and lutein, biotin, and fish oil supplements, none of which have been associated with hyperpigmentation.

Polypharmacy adds a layer of difficulty in identifying the inciting cause of pigmentary change. In our case, symptoms began 3 weeks after the initiation of belumosudil. There were no cutaneous reactions observed in the ROCKstar study of belumosudil; the most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection, diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, increased liver enzymes, and dyspnea.4,5 Patients on belumosudil have developed aggressive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.6 However, a search of PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms acalabrutinib or belumosudil with hyperpigmentation or cutaneous reaction returned no reports of these medications causing hyperpigmentation or cutaneous deposits.

Treatment of drug-induced hyperpigmentation is difficult because discontinuation of the offending agent typically confirms diagnosis, but interruption of treatment is not always possible, as in our patient. The skin changes can fade over time, but effects typically are long lasting.

Dermatologists play a key role in the identification of drug-induced skin hyperpigmentation. After endocrine or metabolic causes of skin hyperpigmentation have been ruled out, a thorough review of the patient’s medication list should be done to assess for a drug-induced cause. Treatment is limited to sun avoidance, as interruption of treatment may not be possible, and lesions typically do fade over time. These chronic skin changes can have a psychosocial effect on patients and regular follow-up is recommended.

References
  1. Giménez García RM, Carrasco Molina S. Drug-induced hyperpigmentation: review and case series. J Am Board Fam Med. 2019;32:628-638. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2019.04.180212
  2. Dereure O. Drug-induced skin pigmentation. epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2001;2:253-62. doi:10.2165/00128071-200102040-00006
  3. Sibaud V, Beylot-Barry M, Protin C, et al. Dermatological toxicities of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020; 21:799-812. doi:10.1007/s40257-020-00535-x
  4. Cutler C, Lee SJ, Arai S, et al. Belumosudil for chronic graft-versus-host disease after 2 or more prior lines of therapy: the ROCKstar Study. Blood. 2021;138:2278-2289. doi:10.1182/blood.2021012021
  5. Jagasia M, Lazaryan A, Bachier CR, et al. ROCK2 inhibition with belumosudil (KD025) for the treatment of chronic graftversus- host disease. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1888-1898. doi:10.1200 /JCO.20.02754
  6. Lee GH, Guzman AK, Divito SJ, et al. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma after treatment with ruxolitinib or belumosudil. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:188-190. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2304157
References
  1. Giménez García RM, Carrasco Molina S. Drug-induced hyperpigmentation: review and case series. J Am Board Fam Med. 2019;32:628-638. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2019.04.180212
  2. Dereure O. Drug-induced skin pigmentation. epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2001;2:253-62. doi:10.2165/00128071-200102040-00006
  3. Sibaud V, Beylot-Barry M, Protin C, et al. Dermatological toxicities of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2020; 21:799-812. doi:10.1007/s40257-020-00535-x
  4. Cutler C, Lee SJ, Arai S, et al. Belumosudil for chronic graft-versus-host disease after 2 or more prior lines of therapy: the ROCKstar Study. Blood. 2021;138:2278-2289. doi:10.1182/blood.2021012021
  5. Jagasia M, Lazaryan A, Bachier CR, et al. ROCK2 inhibition with belumosudil (KD025) for the treatment of chronic graftversus- host disease. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1888-1898. doi:10.1200 /JCO.20.02754
  6. Lee GH, Guzman AK, Divito SJ, et al. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma after treatment with ruxolitinib or belumosudil. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:188-190. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2304157
Issue
Cutis - 116(1)
Issue
Cutis - 116(1)
Page Number
E5-E7
Page Number
E5-E7
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Atypical Skin Bronzing in Response to Belumosudil for Graft-vs-Host Disease

Display Headline

Atypical Skin Bronzing in Response to Belumosudil for Graft-vs-Host Disease

Sections
Inside the Article

PRACTICE POINTS

  • Drug-induced hyperpigmentation is a common cause of acquired hyperpigmentation and should be evaluated after metabolic or endocrine causes are ruled out.
  • Belumosudil for chronic graft-vs-host disease can induce rapid-onset diffuse bronzing hyperpigmentation, even in the absence of other systemic or laboratory abnormalities.
  • Treatment entails discontinuation of the offending agent and limitation of exacerbating factors such as sun exposure.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Fri, 07/18/2025 - 12:57
Un-Gate On Date
Fri, 07/18/2025 - 12:57
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Fri, 07/18/2025 - 12:57
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Fri, 07/18/2025 - 12:57

Enhancing Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Patient Education, Communication, and Anxiety Management

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 16:38
Display Headline

Enhancing Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Patient Education, Communication, and Anxiety Management

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS)—developed by Dr. Frederic Mohs in the 1930s—is the gold standard for treating various cutaneous malignancies. It provides maximal conservation of uninvolved tissues while producing higher cure rates compared to wide local excision.1,2

We sought to assess the various characteristics that impact patient satisfaction to help Mohs surgeons incorporate relatively simple yet clinically significant practices into their patient encounters. We conducted a systematic literature search of peer-reviewed PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE from database inception through November 2023 using the terms Mohs micrographic surgery and patient satisfaction. Among the inclusion criteria were studies involving participants having undergone MMS, with objective assessments on patient-reported satisfaction or preferences related to patient education, communication, anxiety-alleviating measures, or QOL in MMS. Studies were excluded if they failed to meet these criteria, were outdated and no longer clinically relevant, or measured unalterable factors with no significant impact on how Mohs surgeons could change clinical practice. Of the 157 nonreplicated studies identified, 34 met inclusion criteria.

Perioperative Patient Communication and Education Techniques

Perioperative Patient Communication—Many studies have evaluated the impact of perioperative patient-provider communication and education on patient satisfaction in those undergoing MMS. Studies focusing on preoperative and postoperative telephone calls, patient consultation formats, and patient-perceived impact of such communication modalities have been well documented (Table 1).3-8 The importance of the patient follow-up after MMS was further supported by a retrospective study concluding that 88.7% (86/97) of patients regarded follow-up visits as important, and 80% (77/97) desired additional follow-up 3 months after MMS.9 Additional studies have highlighted the importance of thorough and open perioperative patient-provider communication during MMS (Table 2).10-12

CT115006011_e-Table1CT115006011_e-Table2

Patient-Education Techniques—Many studies have assessed the use of visual models to aid in patient education on MMS, specifically the preprocedural consent process (Table 3).13-16 Additionally, 2 randomized controlled trials assessing the use of at-home and same-day in-office preoperative educational videos concluded that these interventions increased patient knowledge and confidence regarding procedural risks and benefits, with no statistically significant differences in patient anxiety or satisfaction.17,18

CT115006011_e-Table3

Despite the availability of these educational videos, many patients often turn to online resources for self-education, which is problematic if reader literacy is incongruent with online readability. One study assessing readability of online MMS resources concluded that the most accessed articles exceeded the recommended reading level for adequate patient comprehension.19 A survey studying a wide range of variables related to patient satisfaction (eg, demographics, socioeconomics, health status) in 339 MMS patients found that those who considered themselves more involved in the decision-making process were more satisfied in the short-term, and married patients had even higher long-term satisfaction. Interestingly, this study also concluded that undergoing 3 or more MMS stages was associated with higher short- and long-term satisfaction, likely secondary to perceived effects of increased overall care, medical attention, and time spent with the provider.20

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding patient education and communication13-20:

  • Preoperative and same-day postoperative telephone follow-up (TFU) do not show statistically significant impacts on patient satisfaction; however, TFU allows for identification of postoperative concerns and inadequate pain management, which may have downstream effects on long-term perception of the overall patient experience.
  • The use of video-assisted consent yields improved patient satisfaction and knowledge, while video content—traditional or didactic—has no impact on satisfaction in new MMS patients.
  • The use of at-home or same-day in-office preoperative educational videos can improve procedural knowledge and risk-benefit understanding of MMS while having no impact on satisfaction.
  • Bedside manner and effective in-person communication by the provider often takes precedence in the patient experience; however, implementation of additional educational modalities should be considered.

Patient Anxiety and QOL

Reducing Patient Anxiety—The use of perioperative distractors to reduce patient anxiety may play an integral role when patients undergo MMS, as there often are prolonged waiting periods between stages when patients may feel increasingly vulnerable or anxious. Table 4 reviews studies on perioperative distractors that showed a statistically significant reduction in MMS patient anxiety.21-24

CT115006011_e-Table4

Although not statistically significant, additional studies evaluating the use of intraoperative anxiety-reduction methods in MMS have demonstrated a downtrend in patient anxiety with the following interventions: engaging in small talk with clinic staff, bringing a guest, eating, watching television, communicating surgical expectations with the provider, handholding, use of a stress ball, and use of 3-dimensional educational MMS models.25-27 Similarly, a survey of 73 patients undergoing MMS found that patients tended to enjoy complimentary beverages preprocedurally in the waiting room, reading, speaking with their guest, watching television, or using their telephone during wait times.28 Table 5 lists additional perioperative factors encompassing specific patient and surgical characteristics that help reduce patient anxiety.29-32

CT115006011_e-Table5

Patient QOL—Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety often show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience. A prospective observational study of MMS patients noted a statistically significant improvement in patient QOL scores 3 months postsurgery (P=.0007), demonstrating that MMS generally results in positive patient outcomes despite preprocedural anxiety.33 An additional prospective study in MMS patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer concluded that sex, age, and closure type—factors often shown to affect anxiety levels—did not significantly impact patient satisfaction.34 Similarly, high satisfaction levels can be expected among MMS patients undergoing treatment of melanoma in situ, with more than 90% of patients rating their treatment experience a 4 (agree) or 5 (strongly agree) out of 5 in short- and long-term satisfaction assessments (38/41 and 40/42, respectively).35 This assessment, conducted 3 months postoperatively, asked patients to score the statement, “I am completely satisfied with the treatment of my skin problem,” on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Lastly, patient perception of their surgeon’s skill may contribute to levels of patient satisfaction. Although suture spacing has not been shown to affect surgical outcomes, it has been demonstrated to impact the patient’s perception of surgical skill and is further supported by a study concluding that closures with 2-mm spacing were ranked significantly lower by patients compared with closures with either 4- or 6-mm spacing (P=.005 and P=.012, respectively).36

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding anxiety-reducing measures and patient-perceived QOL21-36:

  • Factors shown to decrease patient anxiety include patient personalized music, virtual-reality experience, perioperative informational videos, and 3-dimensional–printed MMS models.
  • Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience.
  • Higher anxiety can be associated with worse QOL scores in MMS patients, and additional factors that may have a negative impact on anxiety include female sex, younger age, and tumor location on the face.

Conclusion

Many factors affect patient satisfaction in MMS. Increased awareness and acknowledgement of these factors can foster improved clinical practice and patient experience, which can have downstream effects on patient compliance and overall psychosocial and medical well-being. With the movement toward value-based health care, patient satisfaction ratings are likely to play an increasingly important role in physician reimbursement. Adapting one’s practice to include high-quality, time-efficient, patient-centered care goes hand in hand with increasing MMS patient satisfaction. Careful evaluation and scrutiny of one’s current practices while remaining cognizant of patient population, resource availability, and clinical limitations often reveal opportunities for small adjustments that can have a great impact on patient satisfaction. This thorough assessment and review of the published literature aims to assist MMS surgeons in understanding the role that certain factors—(1) perioperative patient communication and education techniques and (2) patient anxiety, QOL, and additional considerations—have on overall satisfaction with MMS. Specific consideration should be placed on the fact that patient satisfaction is multifactorial, and many different interventions can have a positive impact on the overall patient experience.

References
  1. Trost LB, Bailin PL. History of Mohs surgery. Dermatol Clin. 2011; 29:135-139, vii. doi:10.1016/j.det.2011.01.010
  2. Leslie DF, Greenway HT. Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer. Australas J Dermatol. 1991;32:159-164. doi:10.1111/j.1440 -0960.1991.tb01783.x
  3. Sobanko JF, Da Silva D, Chiesa Fuxench ZC, et al. Preoperative telephone consultation does not decrease patient anxiety before Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:519-526. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.09.027
  4. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim On SC, et al. Separate- versus same-day preoperative consultation in dermatologic surgery: a patient-centered investigation in an academic practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:240-247. doi:10.1111/dsu.12083
  5. Knackstedt TJ, Samie FH. Shared medical appointments for the preoperative consultation visit of Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:340-344. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.10.022
  6. Vance S, Fontecilla N, Samie FH, et al. Effect of postoperative telephone calls on patient satisfaction and scar satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1459-1464. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001913
  7. Hafiji J, Salmon P, Hussain W. Patient satisfaction with post-operative telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a New Zealand and U.K. experience. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:570-574. doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2133.2012.11011.x
  8. Bednarek R, Jonak C, Golda N. Optimal timing of postoperative patient telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:220-221. doi:10.1016 /j.jaad.2020.07.106
  9. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim-On S, et al. Postoperative preferences in cutaneous surgery: a patient-centered investigation from an academic dermatologic surgery practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:773-778. doi:10.1111/dsu.12136
  10. Xu S, Atanelov Z, Bhatia AC. Online patient-reported reviews of Mohs micrographic surgery: qualitative analysis of positive and negative experiences. Cutis. 2017;99:E25-E29.
  11. Golda N, Beeson S, Kohli N, et al. Recommendations for improving the patient experience in specialty encounters. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:653-659. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.05.040
  12. Patel P, Malik K, Khachemoune A. Patient education in Mohs surgery: a review and critical evaluation of techniques. Arch Dermatol Res. 2021;313:217-224. doi:10.1007/s00403-020-02119-5
  13. Migden M, Chavez-Frazier A, Nguyen T. The use of high definition video modules for delivery of informed consent and wound care education in the Mohs surgery unit. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2008;27:89-93. doi:10.1016/j.sder.2008.02.001
  14. Newsom E, Lee E, Rossi A, et al. Modernizing the Mohs surgery consultation: instituting a video module for improved patient education and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:778-784. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001473
  15. West L, Srivastava D, Goldberg LH, et al. Multimedia technology used to supplement patient consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:586-590. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002134
  16. Miao Y, Venning VL, Mallitt KA, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing video-assisted informed consent with standard consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. JAAD Int. 2020;1:13-20. doi:10.1016 /j.jdin.2020.03.005
  17. Mann J, Li L, Kulakov E, et al. Home viewing of educational video improves patient understanding of Mohs micrographic surgery. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2022;47:93-97. doi:10.1111/ced.14845
  18. Delcambre M, Haynes D, Hajar T, et al. Using a multimedia tool for informed consent in Mohs surgery: a randomized trial measuring effects on patient anxiety, knowledge, and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:591-598. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002213
  19. Vargas CR, DePry J, Lee BT, et al. The readability of online patient information about Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42:1135-1141. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000000866
  20. Asgari MM, Warton EM, Neugebauer R, et al. Predictors of patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery: analysis of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors in a prospective cohort. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:1387-1394.
  21. Vachiramon V, Sobanko JF, Rattanaumpawan P, et al. Music reduces patient anxiety during Mohs surgery: an open-label randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:298-305. doi:10.1111/dsu.12047
  22. Hawkins SD, Koch SB, Williford PM, et al. Web app- and text message-based patient education in Mohs micrographic surgery-a randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:924-932. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001489
  23. Higgins S, Feinstein S, Hawkins M, et al. Virtual reality to improve the experience of the Mohs patient-a prospective interventional study. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1009-1018. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000001854
  24. Guo D, Zloty DM, Kossintseva I. Efficacy and safety of anxiolytics in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2023;49:989-994. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000003905
  25. Locke MC, Wilkerson EC, Mistur RL, et al. 2015 Arte Poster Competition first place winner: assessing the correlation between patient anxiety and satisfaction for Mohs surgery. J Drugs Dermatol. 2015;14:1070-1072.
  26. Yanes AF, Weil A, Furlan KC, et al. Effect of stress ball use or hand-holding on anxiety during skin cancer excision: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1045-1049. doi:10.1001 /jamadermatol.2018.1783
  27. Biro M, Kim I, Huynh A, et al. The use of 3-dimensionally printed models to optimize patient education and alleviate perioperative anxiety in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1339-1345. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.085
  28. Ali FR, Al-Niaimi F, Craythorne EE, et al. Patient satisfaction and the waiting room in Mohs surgery: appropriate prewarning may abrogate boredom. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017;31:e337-e338.
  29. Kossintseva I, Zloty D. Determinants and timeline of perioperative anxiety in Mohs surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:1029-1035.
  30. Kruchevsky D, Hirth J, Capucha T, et al. Triggers of preoperative anxiety in patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:1110-1112.
  31. Kokoska RE, Szeto MD, Steadman L, et al. Analysis of factors contributing to perioperative Mohs micrographic surgery anxiety: patient survey study at an academic center. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:1279-1282.
  32. Long J, Rajabi-Estarabadi A, Levin A, et al. Perioperative anxiety associated with Mohs micrographic surgery: a survey-based study. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:711-715.
  33. Zhang J, Miller CJ, O’Malley V, et al. Patient quality of life fluctuates before and after Mohs micrographic surgery: a longitudinal assessment of the patient experience. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1060-1067.
  34. Lee EB, Ford A, Clarey D, et al. Patient outcomes and satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery in patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer. Dermatol Sur. 2021;47:1190-1194.
  35. Condie D, West L, Hynan LS, et al. Patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery for melanoma in situ. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:288-290.
  36. Arshanapalli A, Tra n JM, Aylward JL, et al. The effect of suture spacing on patient perception of surgical skill. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:735-736.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Marlee Wimberley, MD, 1000 NE 13th St #1c, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 June;115(6):E11-E16. doi:10.12788/cutis.1242

Issue
Cutis - 115(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E11-E16
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Marlee Wimberley, MD, 1000 NE 13th St #1c, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 June;115(6):E11-E16. doi:10.12788/cutis.1242

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Marlee Wimberley, MD, 1000 NE 13th St #1c, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2025 June;115(6):E11-E16. doi:10.12788/cutis.1242

Article PDF
Article PDF

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS)—developed by Dr. Frederic Mohs in the 1930s—is the gold standard for treating various cutaneous malignancies. It provides maximal conservation of uninvolved tissues while producing higher cure rates compared to wide local excision.1,2

We sought to assess the various characteristics that impact patient satisfaction to help Mohs surgeons incorporate relatively simple yet clinically significant practices into their patient encounters. We conducted a systematic literature search of peer-reviewed PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE from database inception through November 2023 using the terms Mohs micrographic surgery and patient satisfaction. Among the inclusion criteria were studies involving participants having undergone MMS, with objective assessments on patient-reported satisfaction or preferences related to patient education, communication, anxiety-alleviating measures, or QOL in MMS. Studies were excluded if they failed to meet these criteria, were outdated and no longer clinically relevant, or measured unalterable factors with no significant impact on how Mohs surgeons could change clinical practice. Of the 157 nonreplicated studies identified, 34 met inclusion criteria.

Perioperative Patient Communication and Education Techniques

Perioperative Patient Communication—Many studies have evaluated the impact of perioperative patient-provider communication and education on patient satisfaction in those undergoing MMS. Studies focusing on preoperative and postoperative telephone calls, patient consultation formats, and patient-perceived impact of such communication modalities have been well documented (Table 1).3-8 The importance of the patient follow-up after MMS was further supported by a retrospective study concluding that 88.7% (86/97) of patients regarded follow-up visits as important, and 80% (77/97) desired additional follow-up 3 months after MMS.9 Additional studies have highlighted the importance of thorough and open perioperative patient-provider communication during MMS (Table 2).10-12

CT115006011_e-Table1CT115006011_e-Table2

Patient-Education Techniques—Many studies have assessed the use of visual models to aid in patient education on MMS, specifically the preprocedural consent process (Table 3).13-16 Additionally, 2 randomized controlled trials assessing the use of at-home and same-day in-office preoperative educational videos concluded that these interventions increased patient knowledge and confidence regarding procedural risks and benefits, with no statistically significant differences in patient anxiety or satisfaction.17,18

CT115006011_e-Table3

Despite the availability of these educational videos, many patients often turn to online resources for self-education, which is problematic if reader literacy is incongruent with online readability. One study assessing readability of online MMS resources concluded that the most accessed articles exceeded the recommended reading level for adequate patient comprehension.19 A survey studying a wide range of variables related to patient satisfaction (eg, demographics, socioeconomics, health status) in 339 MMS patients found that those who considered themselves more involved in the decision-making process were more satisfied in the short-term, and married patients had even higher long-term satisfaction. Interestingly, this study also concluded that undergoing 3 or more MMS stages was associated with higher short- and long-term satisfaction, likely secondary to perceived effects of increased overall care, medical attention, and time spent with the provider.20

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding patient education and communication13-20:

  • Preoperative and same-day postoperative telephone follow-up (TFU) do not show statistically significant impacts on patient satisfaction; however, TFU allows for identification of postoperative concerns and inadequate pain management, which may have downstream effects on long-term perception of the overall patient experience.
  • The use of video-assisted consent yields improved patient satisfaction and knowledge, while video content—traditional or didactic—has no impact on satisfaction in new MMS patients.
  • The use of at-home or same-day in-office preoperative educational videos can improve procedural knowledge and risk-benefit understanding of MMS while having no impact on satisfaction.
  • Bedside manner and effective in-person communication by the provider often takes precedence in the patient experience; however, implementation of additional educational modalities should be considered.

Patient Anxiety and QOL

Reducing Patient Anxiety—The use of perioperative distractors to reduce patient anxiety may play an integral role when patients undergo MMS, as there often are prolonged waiting periods between stages when patients may feel increasingly vulnerable or anxious. Table 4 reviews studies on perioperative distractors that showed a statistically significant reduction in MMS patient anxiety.21-24

CT115006011_e-Table4

Although not statistically significant, additional studies evaluating the use of intraoperative anxiety-reduction methods in MMS have demonstrated a downtrend in patient anxiety with the following interventions: engaging in small talk with clinic staff, bringing a guest, eating, watching television, communicating surgical expectations with the provider, handholding, use of a stress ball, and use of 3-dimensional educational MMS models.25-27 Similarly, a survey of 73 patients undergoing MMS found that patients tended to enjoy complimentary beverages preprocedurally in the waiting room, reading, speaking with their guest, watching television, or using their telephone during wait times.28 Table 5 lists additional perioperative factors encompassing specific patient and surgical characteristics that help reduce patient anxiety.29-32

CT115006011_e-Table5

Patient QOL—Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety often show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience. A prospective observational study of MMS patients noted a statistically significant improvement in patient QOL scores 3 months postsurgery (P=.0007), demonstrating that MMS generally results in positive patient outcomes despite preprocedural anxiety.33 An additional prospective study in MMS patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer concluded that sex, age, and closure type—factors often shown to affect anxiety levels—did not significantly impact patient satisfaction.34 Similarly, high satisfaction levels can be expected among MMS patients undergoing treatment of melanoma in situ, with more than 90% of patients rating their treatment experience a 4 (agree) or 5 (strongly agree) out of 5 in short- and long-term satisfaction assessments (38/41 and 40/42, respectively).35 This assessment, conducted 3 months postoperatively, asked patients to score the statement, “I am completely satisfied with the treatment of my skin problem,” on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Lastly, patient perception of their surgeon’s skill may contribute to levels of patient satisfaction. Although suture spacing has not been shown to affect surgical outcomes, it has been demonstrated to impact the patient’s perception of surgical skill and is further supported by a study concluding that closures with 2-mm spacing were ranked significantly lower by patients compared with closures with either 4- or 6-mm spacing (P=.005 and P=.012, respectively).36

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding anxiety-reducing measures and patient-perceived QOL21-36:

  • Factors shown to decrease patient anxiety include patient personalized music, virtual-reality experience, perioperative informational videos, and 3-dimensional–printed MMS models.
  • Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience.
  • Higher anxiety can be associated with worse QOL scores in MMS patients, and additional factors that may have a negative impact on anxiety include female sex, younger age, and tumor location on the face.

Conclusion

Many factors affect patient satisfaction in MMS. Increased awareness and acknowledgement of these factors can foster improved clinical practice and patient experience, which can have downstream effects on patient compliance and overall psychosocial and medical well-being. With the movement toward value-based health care, patient satisfaction ratings are likely to play an increasingly important role in physician reimbursement. Adapting one’s practice to include high-quality, time-efficient, patient-centered care goes hand in hand with increasing MMS patient satisfaction. Careful evaluation and scrutiny of one’s current practices while remaining cognizant of patient population, resource availability, and clinical limitations often reveal opportunities for small adjustments that can have a great impact on patient satisfaction. This thorough assessment and review of the published literature aims to assist MMS surgeons in understanding the role that certain factors—(1) perioperative patient communication and education techniques and (2) patient anxiety, QOL, and additional considerations—have on overall satisfaction with MMS. Specific consideration should be placed on the fact that patient satisfaction is multifactorial, and many different interventions can have a positive impact on the overall patient experience.

Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS)—developed by Dr. Frederic Mohs in the 1930s—is the gold standard for treating various cutaneous malignancies. It provides maximal conservation of uninvolved tissues while producing higher cure rates compared to wide local excision.1,2

We sought to assess the various characteristics that impact patient satisfaction to help Mohs surgeons incorporate relatively simple yet clinically significant practices into their patient encounters. We conducted a systematic literature search of peer-reviewed PubMed articles indexed for MEDLINE from database inception through November 2023 using the terms Mohs micrographic surgery and patient satisfaction. Among the inclusion criteria were studies involving participants having undergone MMS, with objective assessments on patient-reported satisfaction or preferences related to patient education, communication, anxiety-alleviating measures, or QOL in MMS. Studies were excluded if they failed to meet these criteria, were outdated and no longer clinically relevant, or measured unalterable factors with no significant impact on how Mohs surgeons could change clinical practice. Of the 157 nonreplicated studies identified, 34 met inclusion criteria.

Perioperative Patient Communication and Education Techniques

Perioperative Patient Communication—Many studies have evaluated the impact of perioperative patient-provider communication and education on patient satisfaction in those undergoing MMS. Studies focusing on preoperative and postoperative telephone calls, patient consultation formats, and patient-perceived impact of such communication modalities have been well documented (Table 1).3-8 The importance of the patient follow-up after MMS was further supported by a retrospective study concluding that 88.7% (86/97) of patients regarded follow-up visits as important, and 80% (77/97) desired additional follow-up 3 months after MMS.9 Additional studies have highlighted the importance of thorough and open perioperative patient-provider communication during MMS (Table 2).10-12

CT115006011_e-Table1CT115006011_e-Table2

Patient-Education Techniques—Many studies have assessed the use of visual models to aid in patient education on MMS, specifically the preprocedural consent process (Table 3).13-16 Additionally, 2 randomized controlled trials assessing the use of at-home and same-day in-office preoperative educational videos concluded that these interventions increased patient knowledge and confidence regarding procedural risks and benefits, with no statistically significant differences in patient anxiety or satisfaction.17,18

CT115006011_e-Table3

Despite the availability of these educational videos, many patients often turn to online resources for self-education, which is problematic if reader literacy is incongruent with online readability. One study assessing readability of online MMS resources concluded that the most accessed articles exceeded the recommended reading level for adequate patient comprehension.19 A survey studying a wide range of variables related to patient satisfaction (eg, demographics, socioeconomics, health status) in 339 MMS patients found that those who considered themselves more involved in the decision-making process were more satisfied in the short-term, and married patients had even higher long-term satisfaction. Interestingly, this study also concluded that undergoing 3 or more MMS stages was associated with higher short- and long-term satisfaction, likely secondary to perceived effects of increased overall care, medical attention, and time spent with the provider.20

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding patient education and communication13-20:

  • Preoperative and same-day postoperative telephone follow-up (TFU) do not show statistically significant impacts on patient satisfaction; however, TFU allows for identification of postoperative concerns and inadequate pain management, which may have downstream effects on long-term perception of the overall patient experience.
  • The use of video-assisted consent yields improved patient satisfaction and knowledge, while video content—traditional or didactic—has no impact on satisfaction in new MMS patients.
  • The use of at-home or same-day in-office preoperative educational videos can improve procedural knowledge and risk-benefit understanding of MMS while having no impact on satisfaction.
  • Bedside manner and effective in-person communication by the provider often takes precedence in the patient experience; however, implementation of additional educational modalities should be considered.

Patient Anxiety and QOL

Reducing Patient Anxiety—The use of perioperative distractors to reduce patient anxiety may play an integral role when patients undergo MMS, as there often are prolonged waiting periods between stages when patients may feel increasingly vulnerable or anxious. Table 4 reviews studies on perioperative distractors that showed a statistically significant reduction in MMS patient anxiety.21-24

CT115006011_e-Table4

Although not statistically significant, additional studies evaluating the use of intraoperative anxiety-reduction methods in MMS have demonstrated a downtrend in patient anxiety with the following interventions: engaging in small talk with clinic staff, bringing a guest, eating, watching television, communicating surgical expectations with the provider, handholding, use of a stress ball, and use of 3-dimensional educational MMS models.25-27 Similarly, a survey of 73 patients undergoing MMS found that patients tended to enjoy complimentary beverages preprocedurally in the waiting room, reading, speaking with their guest, watching television, or using their telephone during wait times.28 Table 5 lists additional perioperative factors encompassing specific patient and surgical characteristics that help reduce patient anxiety.29-32

CT115006011_e-Table5

Patient QOL—Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety often show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience. A prospective observational study of MMS patients noted a statistically significant improvement in patient QOL scores 3 months postsurgery (P=.0007), demonstrating that MMS generally results in positive patient outcomes despite preprocedural anxiety.33 An additional prospective study in MMS patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer concluded that sex, age, and closure type—factors often shown to affect anxiety levels—did not significantly impact patient satisfaction.34 Similarly, high satisfaction levels can be expected among MMS patients undergoing treatment of melanoma in situ, with more than 90% of patients rating their treatment experience a 4 (agree) or 5 (strongly agree) out of 5 in short- and long-term satisfaction assessments (38/41 and 40/42, respectively).35 This assessment, conducted 3 months postoperatively, asked patients to score the statement, “I am completely satisfied with the treatment of my skin problem,” on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Lastly, patient perception of their surgeon’s skill may contribute to levels of patient satisfaction. Although suture spacing has not been shown to affect surgical outcomes, it has been demonstrated to impact the patient’s perception of surgical skill and is further supported by a study concluding that closures with 2-mm spacing were ranked significantly lower by patients compared with closures with either 4- or 6-mm spacing (P=.005 and P=.012, respectively).36

Synthesis of this information with emphasis on the higher evidence-based studies—including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials—yields the following beneficial interventions regarding anxiety-reducing measures and patient-perceived QOL21-36:

  • Factors shown to decrease patient anxiety include patient personalized music, virtual-reality experience, perioperative informational videos, and 3-dimensional–printed MMS models.
  • Many methods aimed at decreasing MMS-related patient anxiety show no direct impact on patient satisfaction, likely due to the multifactorial nature of the patient-perceived experience.
  • Higher anxiety can be associated with worse QOL scores in MMS patients, and additional factors that may have a negative impact on anxiety include female sex, younger age, and tumor location on the face.

Conclusion

Many factors affect patient satisfaction in MMS. Increased awareness and acknowledgement of these factors can foster improved clinical practice and patient experience, which can have downstream effects on patient compliance and overall psychosocial and medical well-being. With the movement toward value-based health care, patient satisfaction ratings are likely to play an increasingly important role in physician reimbursement. Adapting one’s practice to include high-quality, time-efficient, patient-centered care goes hand in hand with increasing MMS patient satisfaction. Careful evaluation and scrutiny of one’s current practices while remaining cognizant of patient population, resource availability, and clinical limitations often reveal opportunities for small adjustments that can have a great impact on patient satisfaction. This thorough assessment and review of the published literature aims to assist MMS surgeons in understanding the role that certain factors—(1) perioperative patient communication and education techniques and (2) patient anxiety, QOL, and additional considerations—have on overall satisfaction with MMS. Specific consideration should be placed on the fact that patient satisfaction is multifactorial, and many different interventions can have a positive impact on the overall patient experience.

References
  1. Trost LB, Bailin PL. History of Mohs surgery. Dermatol Clin. 2011; 29:135-139, vii. doi:10.1016/j.det.2011.01.010
  2. Leslie DF, Greenway HT. Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer. Australas J Dermatol. 1991;32:159-164. doi:10.1111/j.1440 -0960.1991.tb01783.x
  3. Sobanko JF, Da Silva D, Chiesa Fuxench ZC, et al. Preoperative telephone consultation does not decrease patient anxiety before Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:519-526. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.09.027
  4. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim On SC, et al. Separate- versus same-day preoperative consultation in dermatologic surgery: a patient-centered investigation in an academic practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:240-247. doi:10.1111/dsu.12083
  5. Knackstedt TJ, Samie FH. Shared medical appointments for the preoperative consultation visit of Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:340-344. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.10.022
  6. Vance S, Fontecilla N, Samie FH, et al. Effect of postoperative telephone calls on patient satisfaction and scar satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1459-1464. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001913
  7. Hafiji J, Salmon P, Hussain W. Patient satisfaction with post-operative telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a New Zealand and U.K. experience. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:570-574. doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2133.2012.11011.x
  8. Bednarek R, Jonak C, Golda N. Optimal timing of postoperative patient telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:220-221. doi:10.1016 /j.jaad.2020.07.106
  9. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim-On S, et al. Postoperative preferences in cutaneous surgery: a patient-centered investigation from an academic dermatologic surgery practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:773-778. doi:10.1111/dsu.12136
  10. Xu S, Atanelov Z, Bhatia AC. Online patient-reported reviews of Mohs micrographic surgery: qualitative analysis of positive and negative experiences. Cutis. 2017;99:E25-E29.
  11. Golda N, Beeson S, Kohli N, et al. Recommendations for improving the patient experience in specialty encounters. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:653-659. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.05.040
  12. Patel P, Malik K, Khachemoune A. Patient education in Mohs surgery: a review and critical evaluation of techniques. Arch Dermatol Res. 2021;313:217-224. doi:10.1007/s00403-020-02119-5
  13. Migden M, Chavez-Frazier A, Nguyen T. The use of high definition video modules for delivery of informed consent and wound care education in the Mohs surgery unit. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2008;27:89-93. doi:10.1016/j.sder.2008.02.001
  14. Newsom E, Lee E, Rossi A, et al. Modernizing the Mohs surgery consultation: instituting a video module for improved patient education and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:778-784. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001473
  15. West L, Srivastava D, Goldberg LH, et al. Multimedia technology used to supplement patient consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:586-590. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002134
  16. Miao Y, Venning VL, Mallitt KA, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing video-assisted informed consent with standard consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. JAAD Int. 2020;1:13-20. doi:10.1016 /j.jdin.2020.03.005
  17. Mann J, Li L, Kulakov E, et al. Home viewing of educational video improves patient understanding of Mohs micrographic surgery. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2022;47:93-97. doi:10.1111/ced.14845
  18. Delcambre M, Haynes D, Hajar T, et al. Using a multimedia tool for informed consent in Mohs surgery: a randomized trial measuring effects on patient anxiety, knowledge, and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:591-598. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002213
  19. Vargas CR, DePry J, Lee BT, et al. The readability of online patient information about Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42:1135-1141. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000000866
  20. Asgari MM, Warton EM, Neugebauer R, et al. Predictors of patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery: analysis of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors in a prospective cohort. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:1387-1394.
  21. Vachiramon V, Sobanko JF, Rattanaumpawan P, et al. Music reduces patient anxiety during Mohs surgery: an open-label randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:298-305. doi:10.1111/dsu.12047
  22. Hawkins SD, Koch SB, Williford PM, et al. Web app- and text message-based patient education in Mohs micrographic surgery-a randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:924-932. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001489
  23. Higgins S, Feinstein S, Hawkins M, et al. Virtual reality to improve the experience of the Mohs patient-a prospective interventional study. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1009-1018. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000001854
  24. Guo D, Zloty DM, Kossintseva I. Efficacy and safety of anxiolytics in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2023;49:989-994. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000003905
  25. Locke MC, Wilkerson EC, Mistur RL, et al. 2015 Arte Poster Competition first place winner: assessing the correlation between patient anxiety and satisfaction for Mohs surgery. J Drugs Dermatol. 2015;14:1070-1072.
  26. Yanes AF, Weil A, Furlan KC, et al. Effect of stress ball use or hand-holding on anxiety during skin cancer excision: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1045-1049. doi:10.1001 /jamadermatol.2018.1783
  27. Biro M, Kim I, Huynh A, et al. The use of 3-dimensionally printed models to optimize patient education and alleviate perioperative anxiety in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1339-1345. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.085
  28. Ali FR, Al-Niaimi F, Craythorne EE, et al. Patient satisfaction and the waiting room in Mohs surgery: appropriate prewarning may abrogate boredom. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017;31:e337-e338.
  29. Kossintseva I, Zloty D. Determinants and timeline of perioperative anxiety in Mohs surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:1029-1035.
  30. Kruchevsky D, Hirth J, Capucha T, et al. Triggers of preoperative anxiety in patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:1110-1112.
  31. Kokoska RE, Szeto MD, Steadman L, et al. Analysis of factors contributing to perioperative Mohs micrographic surgery anxiety: patient survey study at an academic center. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:1279-1282.
  32. Long J, Rajabi-Estarabadi A, Levin A, et al. Perioperative anxiety associated with Mohs micrographic surgery: a survey-based study. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:711-715.
  33. Zhang J, Miller CJ, O’Malley V, et al. Patient quality of life fluctuates before and after Mohs micrographic surgery: a longitudinal assessment of the patient experience. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1060-1067.
  34. Lee EB, Ford A, Clarey D, et al. Patient outcomes and satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery in patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer. Dermatol Sur. 2021;47:1190-1194.
  35. Condie D, West L, Hynan LS, et al. Patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery for melanoma in situ. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:288-290.
  36. Arshanapalli A, Tra n JM, Aylward JL, et al. The effect of suture spacing on patient perception of surgical skill. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:735-736.
References
  1. Trost LB, Bailin PL. History of Mohs surgery. Dermatol Clin. 2011; 29:135-139, vii. doi:10.1016/j.det.2011.01.010
  2. Leslie DF, Greenway HT. Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer. Australas J Dermatol. 1991;32:159-164. doi:10.1111/j.1440 -0960.1991.tb01783.x
  3. Sobanko JF, Da Silva D, Chiesa Fuxench ZC, et al. Preoperative telephone consultation does not decrease patient anxiety before Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:519-526. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.09.027
  4. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim On SC, et al. Separate- versus same-day preoperative consultation in dermatologic surgery: a patient-centered investigation in an academic practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:240-247. doi:10.1111/dsu.12083
  5. Knackstedt TJ, Samie FH. Shared medical appointments for the preoperative consultation visit of Mohs micrographic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015;72:340-344. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2014.10.022
  6. Vance S, Fontecilla N, Samie FH, et al. Effect of postoperative telephone calls on patient satisfaction and scar satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1459-1464. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001913
  7. Hafiji J, Salmon P, Hussain W. Patient satisfaction with post-operative telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a New Zealand and U.K. experience. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:570-574. doi:10.1111 /j.1365-2133.2012.11011.x
  8. Bednarek R, Jonak C, Golda N. Optimal timing of postoperative patient telephone calls after Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85:220-221. doi:10.1016 /j.jaad.2020.07.106
  9. Sharon VR, Armstrong AW, Jim-On S, et al. Postoperative preferences in cutaneous surgery: a patient-centered investigation from an academic dermatologic surgery practice. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:773-778. doi:10.1111/dsu.12136
  10. Xu S, Atanelov Z, Bhatia AC. Online patient-reported reviews of Mohs micrographic surgery: qualitative analysis of positive and negative experiences. Cutis. 2017;99:E25-E29.
  11. Golda N, Beeson S, Kohli N, et al. Recommendations for improving the patient experience in specialty encounters. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:653-659. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2017.05.040
  12. Patel P, Malik K, Khachemoune A. Patient education in Mohs surgery: a review and critical evaluation of techniques. Arch Dermatol Res. 2021;313:217-224. doi:10.1007/s00403-020-02119-5
  13. Migden M, Chavez-Frazier A, Nguyen T. The use of high definition video modules for delivery of informed consent and wound care education in the Mohs surgery unit. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2008;27:89-93. doi:10.1016/j.sder.2008.02.001
  14. Newsom E, Lee E, Rossi A, et al. Modernizing the Mohs surgery consultation: instituting a video module for improved patient education and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:778-784. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001473
  15. West L, Srivastava D, Goldberg LH, et al. Multimedia technology used to supplement patient consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:586-590. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002134
  16. Miao Y, Venning VL, Mallitt KA, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing video-assisted informed consent with standard consent for Mohs micrographic surgery. JAAD Int. 2020;1:13-20. doi:10.1016 /j.jdin.2020.03.005
  17. Mann J, Li L, Kulakov E, et al. Home viewing of educational video improves patient understanding of Mohs micrographic surgery. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2022;47:93-97. doi:10.1111/ced.14845
  18. Delcambre M, Haynes D, Hajar T, et al. Using a multimedia tool for informed consent in Mohs surgery: a randomized trial measuring effects on patient anxiety, knowledge, and satisfaction. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:591-598. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002213
  19. Vargas CR, DePry J, Lee BT, et al. The readability of online patient information about Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2016;42:1135-1141. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000000866
  20. Asgari MM, Warton EM, Neugebauer R, et al. Predictors of patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery: analysis of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors in a prospective cohort. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:1387-1394.
  21. Vachiramon V, Sobanko JF, Rattanaumpawan P, et al. Music reduces patient anxiety during Mohs surgery: an open-label randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:298-305. doi:10.1111/dsu.12047
  22. Hawkins SD, Koch SB, Williford PM, et al. Web app- and text message-based patient education in Mohs micrographic surgery-a randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:924-932. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001489
  23. Higgins S, Feinstein S, Hawkins M, et al. Virtual reality to improve the experience of the Mohs patient-a prospective interventional study. Dermatol Surg. 2019;45:1009-1018. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000001854
  24. Guo D, Zloty DM, Kossintseva I. Efficacy and safety of anxiolytics in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2023;49:989-994. doi:10.1097 /DSS.0000000000003905
  25. Locke MC, Wilkerson EC, Mistur RL, et al. 2015 Arte Poster Competition first place winner: assessing the correlation between patient anxiety and satisfaction for Mohs surgery. J Drugs Dermatol. 2015;14:1070-1072.
  26. Yanes AF, Weil A, Furlan KC, et al. Effect of stress ball use or hand-holding on anxiety during skin cancer excision: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154:1045-1049. doi:10.1001 /jamadermatol.2018.1783
  27. Biro M, Kim I, Huynh A, et al. The use of 3-dimensionally printed models to optimize patient education and alleviate perioperative anxiety in Mohs micrographic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;81:1339-1345. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.085
  28. Ali FR, Al-Niaimi F, Craythorne EE, et al. Patient satisfaction and the waiting room in Mohs surgery: appropriate prewarning may abrogate boredom. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017;31:e337-e338.
  29. Kossintseva I, Zloty D. Determinants and timeline of perioperative anxiety in Mohs surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2017;43:1029-1035.
  30. Kruchevsky D, Hirth J, Capucha T, et al. Triggers of preoperative anxiety in patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:1110-1112.
  31. Kokoska RE, Szeto MD, Steadman L, et al. Analysis of factors contributing to perioperative Mohs micrographic surgery anxiety: patient survey study at an academic center. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:1279-1282.
  32. Long J, Rajabi-Estarabadi A, Levin A, et al. Perioperative anxiety associated with Mohs micrographic surgery: a survey-based study. Dermatol Surg. 2022;48:711-715.
  33. Zhang J, Miller CJ, O’Malley V, et al. Patient quality of life fluctuates before and after Mohs micrographic surgery: a longitudinal assessment of the patient experience. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;78:1060-1067.
  34. Lee EB, Ford A, Clarey D, et al. Patient outcomes and satisfaction after Mohs micrographic surgery in patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer. Dermatol Sur. 2021;47:1190-1194.
  35. Condie D, West L, Hynan LS, et al. Patient satisfaction with Mohs surgery for melanoma in situ. Dermatol Surg. 2021;47:288-290.
  36. Arshanapalli A, Tra n JM, Aylward JL, et al. The effect of suture spacing on patient perception of surgical skill. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:735-736.
Issue
Cutis - 115(6)
Issue
Cutis - 115(6)
Page Number
E11-E16
Page Number
E11-E16
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Enhancing Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Patient Education, Communication, and Anxiety Management

Display Headline

Enhancing Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life With Mohs Micrographic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Patient Education, Communication, and Anxiety Management

Sections
Inside the Article

PRACTICE POINTS

  • When patients are treated with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), thorough in-person dialogue augmented by pre- and same-day telephone follow-ups can help them feel heard and better supported, even though follow-up calls alone may not drive satisfaction scores.
  • Increased awareness and implementation of the various factors influencing patient satisfaction and quality of life in MMS can enhance clinical practice and improve patient experiences, with potential impacts on compliance, psychosocial well-being, medical outcomes, and physician reimbursement.
  • Patient satisfaction and procedural understanding can be improved with video and visual-based education. Anxiety-reducing methods help lower perioperative stress.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 15:04
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 15:04
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 15:04
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 15:04

Beyond the Razor: Managing Pseudofolliculitis Barbae in Skin of Color

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 07/17/2025 - 08:51
Display Headline

Beyond the Razor: Managing Pseudofolliculitis Barbae in Skin of Color

THE COMPARISON

  • A. Pustules, erythematous to violaceous nodules, and hyperpigmented patches on the lower cheek and chin.
  • B. Brown papules, pink keloidal papules and nodules, pustules, and hyperpigmented papules on the mandibular area and neck.
  • C. Coarse hairs, pustules, and pink papules on the mandibular area and neck.
0425FED-Welch-web

Pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), also known as razor bumps, is a common inflammatory condition characterized by papules and pustules that typically appear in the beard and cheek regions. It occurs when shaved hair regrows and penetrates the skin, leading to irritation and inflammation. While anyone who shaves can develop PFB, it is more prevalent and severe in individuals with naturally tightly coiled, coarse-textured hair.1,2 PFB is common in individuals who shave frequently due to personal choice or profession, such as members of the US military3,4 and firefighters, who are required to remain clean shaven for safety (eg, ensuring proper fit of a respirator mask).5 Early diagnosis and treatment of PFB are essential to prevent long-term complications such as scarring or hyperpigmentation, which may be more severe in those with darker skin tones.

Epidemiology

PFB is most common in Black men, affecting 45% to 83% of men of African ancestry.1,2 This condition also can affect individuals of various ethnicities with coarse or curly hair. The spiral shape of the hair increases the likelihood that it will regrow into the skin after shaving.6 Women with hirsutism who shave also can develop PFB.

Key Clinical Features

The papules and pustules seen in PFB may be flesh colored, erythematous, hyperpigmented, brown, or violaceous. Erythema may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones. Persistent and severe postinflammatory hyperpigmentation may occur, and hypertrophic or keloidal scars may develop in affected areas. Dermoscopy may reveal extrafollicular hair penetration as well as follicular or perifollicular pustules accompanied by hyperkeratosis.

Worth Noting

The most effective management for PFB is to discontinue shaving.1 If shaving is desired or necessary, it is recommended that patients apply lukewarm water to the affected area followed by a generous amount of shaving foam or gel to create a protective antifriction layer that allows the razor to glide more smoothly over the skin and reduces subsequent irritation.2 Using the right razor technology also may help alleviate symptoms. Research has shown that multiblade razors used in conjunction with preshave hair hydration and postshave moisturization do not worsen PFB.2 A recent study found that multiblade razor technology paired with use of a shave foam or gel actually improved skin appearance in patients with PFB.7

It is important to direct patients to shave in the direction of hair growth; however, this may not be possible for individuals with curly or coarse hair, as the hair may grow in many directions.8,9 Patients also should avoid pulling the skin taut while shaving, as doing so allows the hair to be clipped below the surface, where it can repenetrate the skin and cause further irritation. As an alternative to shaving with a razor, patients can use hair clippers to trim beard hair, which leaves behind stubble and interrupts the cycle of retracted hairs under the skin. Nd:YAG laser therapy has demonstrated efficacy in reduction of PFB papules and pustules.9-12 Greater mean improvement in inflammatory papules and reduction in hair density was noted in participants who received Nd:YAG laser plus eflornithine compared with those who received the laser or eflornithine alone.11 Patients should not pluck or dig into the skin to remove any ingrown hairs. If a tweezer is used, the patient should gently lift the tip of the ingrown hair with the tweezer to dislodge it from the skin and prevent plucking out the hair completely.

To help manage inflammation after shaving, topical treatments such as benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel can be used.3,13 A low-potency steroid such as topical hydrocortisone 2.5% applied once or twice daily for up to 2 to 3 days may be helpful.1,14 Adjunctive treatments including keratolytics (eg, topical retinoids, hydroxy acids) reduce perifollicular hyperkeratosis.14,15 Agents containing alpha hydroxy acids (eg, glycolic acid) also can decrease the curvature of the hair itself by reducing the sulfhydryl bonds.6 If secondary bacterial infections occur, oral antibiotics (eg, doxycycline) may be necessary.

Health Disparity Highlight

Individuals with darker skin tones are at higher risk for PFB and associated complications. Limited access to dermatology services may further exacerbate these challenges. Individuals with PFB may not seek medical treatment until the condition becomes severe. Clinicians also may underestimate the severity of PFB—particularly in those with darker skin tones—based on erythema alone because it may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones.16

While permanent hair reduction with laser therapy is a treatment option for PFB, it may be inaccessible to some patients because it can be expensive and is coded as a cosmetic procedure. Additionally, patients may not have access to specialists who are experienced in performing the procedure in those with darker skin tones.9 Some patients also may not want to permanently reduce the amount of hair that grows in the beard area for personal or religious reasons.17

Pseudofolliculitis barbae also has been linked to professional disparities. One study found that members of the US Air Force who had medical shaving waivers experienced longer times to promotion than those with no waiver.18 Delays in promotion may be linked to perceptions of unprofessionalism, exclusion from high-profile duties, and concerns about career progression. While this delay was similar for individuals of all races, the majority of those in the waiver group were Black/African American. In 2021, 4 Black firefighters with PFB were unsuccessful in their bid to get a medical accommodation regarding a New York City Fire Department policy requiring them to be clean shaven where the oxygen mask seals against the skin.5 More research is needed on mask safety and efficiency relative to the length of facial hair. Accommodations or tailored masks for facial hair conditions also are necessary so individuals with PFB can meet job requirements while managing their condition.

References
  1. Alexis A, Heath CR, Halder RM. Folliculitis keloidalis nuchae and pseudofolliculitis barbae: are prevention and effective treatment within reach? Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:183-191.
  2. Gray J, McMichael AJ. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: understanding the condition and the role of facial grooming. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):24-27.
  3. Tshudy MT, Cho S. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the U.S. military, a review. Mil Med. 2021;186:E52-E57.
  4. Jung I, Lannan FM, Weiss A, et al. Treatment and current policies on pseudofolliculitis barbae in the US military. Cutis. 2023;112:299-302.
  5. Jiang YR. Reasonable accommodation and disparate impact: clean shave policy discrimination in today’s workplace. J Law Med Ethics. 2023;51:185-195.
  6. Taylor SC, Barbosa V, Burgess C, et al. Hair and scalp disorders in adult and pediatric patients with skin of color. Cutis. 2017;100:31-35.
  7. Moran E, McMichael A, De Souza B, et al. New razor technology improves appearance and quality of life in men with pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2022;110:329-334.
  8. Maurer M, Rietzler M, Burghardt R, et al. The male beard hair and facial skin—challenges for shaving. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):3-9.
  9. Ross EV. How would you treat this patient with lasers & EBDs? casebased panel. Presented at: Skin of Color Update; September 13, 2024; New York, NY.
  10. Ross EV, Cooke LM, Timko AL, et al. Treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae in skin types IV, V, and VI with a long-pulsed neodymium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47:263-270.
  11. Shokeir H, Samy N, Taymour M. Pseudofolliculitis barbae treatment: efficacy of topical eflornithine, long-pulsed Nd-YAG laser versus their combination. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3517-3525.
  12. Amer A, Elsayed A, Gharib K. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of chemical peeling and long-pulse Nd:YAG laser in treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14859.
  13. Cook-Bolden FE, Barba A, Halder R, et al. Twice-daily applications of benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel versus vehicle in the treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2004;73(6 suppl):18-24.
  14. Nussbaum D, Friedman A. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: a review of current treatment options. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18:246-250.
  15. Quarles FN, Brody H, Johnson BA, et al. Pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2007;20:133-136.
  16. McMichael AJ, Frey C. Challenging the tools used to measure cutaneous lupus severity in patients of all skin types. JAMA Dermatol. 2025;161:9-10.
  17. Okonkwo E, Neal B, Harper HL. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the military and the need for social awareness. Mil Med. 2021;186:143-144.
  18. Ritchie S, Park J, Banta J, et al. Shaving waivers in the United States Air Force and their impact on promotions of Black/African-American members. Mil Med. 2023;188:E242-E247.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

DanTasia Welch, MS  
Research Fellow, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC  
Medical Student, Florida State University College of Medicine Tallahassee

Richard P. Usatine, MD  
Professor, Family and Community Medicine  
Professor, Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Texas Health San Antonio

Candrice R. Heath, MD  
Associate Professor, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC

Dr. Usatine has no relevant financial disclosures to report. DanTasia Welch is the recipient of the 2024-2025 Howard University Department of Dermatology Research Fellowship, supported by AbbVie. Dr. Heath has received fees from Apogee, Arcutis, Dermavant, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson and Johnson, Kenvue, L’Oreal, Nutrafol, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Tower 28, Unilever, and WebMD. Her current and/or former institutions have received research-related funding from CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Robert A. Winn Diversity in Clinical Trials Award Program established by the Bristol Meyers Squibb Foundation, and the Skin of Color Society Foundation.

Federal Practitioner 2025 April;42(4):1-2. doi:10.12788/fp.0581

Issue
Federal Practitioner - 42(4)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
1-2
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

DanTasia Welch, MS  
Research Fellow, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC  
Medical Student, Florida State University College of Medicine Tallahassee

Richard P. Usatine, MD  
Professor, Family and Community Medicine  
Professor, Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Texas Health San Antonio

Candrice R. Heath, MD  
Associate Professor, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC

Dr. Usatine has no relevant financial disclosures to report. DanTasia Welch is the recipient of the 2024-2025 Howard University Department of Dermatology Research Fellowship, supported by AbbVie. Dr. Heath has received fees from Apogee, Arcutis, Dermavant, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson and Johnson, Kenvue, L’Oreal, Nutrafol, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Tower 28, Unilever, and WebMD. Her current and/or former institutions have received research-related funding from CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Robert A. Winn Diversity in Clinical Trials Award Program established by the Bristol Meyers Squibb Foundation, and the Skin of Color Society Foundation.

Federal Practitioner 2025 April;42(4):1-2. doi:10.12788/fp.0581

Author and Disclosure Information

DanTasia Welch, MS  
Research Fellow, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC  
Medical Student, Florida State University College of Medicine Tallahassee

Richard P. Usatine, MD  
Professor, Family and Community Medicine  
Professor, Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Texas Health San Antonio

Candrice R. Heath, MD  
Associate Professor, Department of Dermatology, Howard University, Washington, DC

Dr. Usatine has no relevant financial disclosures to report. DanTasia Welch is the recipient of the 2024-2025 Howard University Department of Dermatology Research Fellowship, supported by AbbVie. Dr. Heath has received fees from Apogee, Arcutis, Dermavant, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson and Johnson, Kenvue, L’Oreal, Nutrafol, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Tower 28, Unilever, and WebMD. Her current and/or former institutions have received research-related funding from CorEvitas, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen, Robert A. Winn Diversity in Clinical Trials Award Program established by the Bristol Meyers Squibb Foundation, and the Skin of Color Society Foundation.

Federal Practitioner 2025 April;42(4):1-2. doi:10.12788/fp.0581

Article PDF
Article PDF

THE COMPARISON

  • A. Pustules, erythematous to violaceous nodules, and hyperpigmented patches on the lower cheek and chin.
  • B. Brown papules, pink keloidal papules and nodules, pustules, and hyperpigmented papules on the mandibular area and neck.
  • C. Coarse hairs, pustules, and pink papules on the mandibular area and neck.
0425FED-Welch-web

Pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), also known as razor bumps, is a common inflammatory condition characterized by papules and pustules that typically appear in the beard and cheek regions. It occurs when shaved hair regrows and penetrates the skin, leading to irritation and inflammation. While anyone who shaves can develop PFB, it is more prevalent and severe in individuals with naturally tightly coiled, coarse-textured hair.1,2 PFB is common in individuals who shave frequently due to personal choice or profession, such as members of the US military3,4 and firefighters, who are required to remain clean shaven for safety (eg, ensuring proper fit of a respirator mask).5 Early diagnosis and treatment of PFB are essential to prevent long-term complications such as scarring or hyperpigmentation, which may be more severe in those with darker skin tones.

Epidemiology

PFB is most common in Black men, affecting 45% to 83% of men of African ancestry.1,2 This condition also can affect individuals of various ethnicities with coarse or curly hair. The spiral shape of the hair increases the likelihood that it will regrow into the skin after shaving.6 Women with hirsutism who shave also can develop PFB.

Key Clinical Features

The papules and pustules seen in PFB may be flesh colored, erythematous, hyperpigmented, brown, or violaceous. Erythema may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones. Persistent and severe postinflammatory hyperpigmentation may occur, and hypertrophic or keloidal scars may develop in affected areas. Dermoscopy may reveal extrafollicular hair penetration as well as follicular or perifollicular pustules accompanied by hyperkeratosis.

Worth Noting

The most effective management for PFB is to discontinue shaving.1 If shaving is desired or necessary, it is recommended that patients apply lukewarm water to the affected area followed by a generous amount of shaving foam or gel to create a protective antifriction layer that allows the razor to glide more smoothly over the skin and reduces subsequent irritation.2 Using the right razor technology also may help alleviate symptoms. Research has shown that multiblade razors used in conjunction with preshave hair hydration and postshave moisturization do not worsen PFB.2 A recent study found that multiblade razor technology paired with use of a shave foam or gel actually improved skin appearance in patients with PFB.7

It is important to direct patients to shave in the direction of hair growth; however, this may not be possible for individuals with curly or coarse hair, as the hair may grow in many directions.8,9 Patients also should avoid pulling the skin taut while shaving, as doing so allows the hair to be clipped below the surface, where it can repenetrate the skin and cause further irritation. As an alternative to shaving with a razor, patients can use hair clippers to trim beard hair, which leaves behind stubble and interrupts the cycle of retracted hairs under the skin. Nd:YAG laser therapy has demonstrated efficacy in reduction of PFB papules and pustules.9-12 Greater mean improvement in inflammatory papules and reduction in hair density was noted in participants who received Nd:YAG laser plus eflornithine compared with those who received the laser or eflornithine alone.11 Patients should not pluck or dig into the skin to remove any ingrown hairs. If a tweezer is used, the patient should gently lift the tip of the ingrown hair with the tweezer to dislodge it from the skin and prevent plucking out the hair completely.

To help manage inflammation after shaving, topical treatments such as benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel can be used.3,13 A low-potency steroid such as topical hydrocortisone 2.5% applied once or twice daily for up to 2 to 3 days may be helpful.1,14 Adjunctive treatments including keratolytics (eg, topical retinoids, hydroxy acids) reduce perifollicular hyperkeratosis.14,15 Agents containing alpha hydroxy acids (eg, glycolic acid) also can decrease the curvature of the hair itself by reducing the sulfhydryl bonds.6 If secondary bacterial infections occur, oral antibiotics (eg, doxycycline) may be necessary.

Health Disparity Highlight

Individuals with darker skin tones are at higher risk for PFB and associated complications. Limited access to dermatology services may further exacerbate these challenges. Individuals with PFB may not seek medical treatment until the condition becomes severe. Clinicians also may underestimate the severity of PFB—particularly in those with darker skin tones—based on erythema alone because it may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones.16

While permanent hair reduction with laser therapy is a treatment option for PFB, it may be inaccessible to some patients because it can be expensive and is coded as a cosmetic procedure. Additionally, patients may not have access to specialists who are experienced in performing the procedure in those with darker skin tones.9 Some patients also may not want to permanently reduce the amount of hair that grows in the beard area for personal or religious reasons.17

Pseudofolliculitis barbae also has been linked to professional disparities. One study found that members of the US Air Force who had medical shaving waivers experienced longer times to promotion than those with no waiver.18 Delays in promotion may be linked to perceptions of unprofessionalism, exclusion from high-profile duties, and concerns about career progression. While this delay was similar for individuals of all races, the majority of those in the waiver group were Black/African American. In 2021, 4 Black firefighters with PFB were unsuccessful in their bid to get a medical accommodation regarding a New York City Fire Department policy requiring them to be clean shaven where the oxygen mask seals against the skin.5 More research is needed on mask safety and efficiency relative to the length of facial hair. Accommodations or tailored masks for facial hair conditions also are necessary so individuals with PFB can meet job requirements while managing their condition.

THE COMPARISON

  • A. Pustules, erythematous to violaceous nodules, and hyperpigmented patches on the lower cheek and chin.
  • B. Brown papules, pink keloidal papules and nodules, pustules, and hyperpigmented papules on the mandibular area and neck.
  • C. Coarse hairs, pustules, and pink papules on the mandibular area and neck.
0425FED-Welch-web

Pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), also known as razor bumps, is a common inflammatory condition characterized by papules and pustules that typically appear in the beard and cheek regions. It occurs when shaved hair regrows and penetrates the skin, leading to irritation and inflammation. While anyone who shaves can develop PFB, it is more prevalent and severe in individuals with naturally tightly coiled, coarse-textured hair.1,2 PFB is common in individuals who shave frequently due to personal choice or profession, such as members of the US military3,4 and firefighters, who are required to remain clean shaven for safety (eg, ensuring proper fit of a respirator mask).5 Early diagnosis and treatment of PFB are essential to prevent long-term complications such as scarring or hyperpigmentation, which may be more severe in those with darker skin tones.

Epidemiology

PFB is most common in Black men, affecting 45% to 83% of men of African ancestry.1,2 This condition also can affect individuals of various ethnicities with coarse or curly hair. The spiral shape of the hair increases the likelihood that it will regrow into the skin after shaving.6 Women with hirsutism who shave also can develop PFB.

Key Clinical Features

The papules and pustules seen in PFB may be flesh colored, erythematous, hyperpigmented, brown, or violaceous. Erythema may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones. Persistent and severe postinflammatory hyperpigmentation may occur, and hypertrophic or keloidal scars may develop in affected areas. Dermoscopy may reveal extrafollicular hair penetration as well as follicular or perifollicular pustules accompanied by hyperkeratosis.

Worth Noting

The most effective management for PFB is to discontinue shaving.1 If shaving is desired or necessary, it is recommended that patients apply lukewarm water to the affected area followed by a generous amount of shaving foam or gel to create a protective antifriction layer that allows the razor to glide more smoothly over the skin and reduces subsequent irritation.2 Using the right razor technology also may help alleviate symptoms. Research has shown that multiblade razors used in conjunction with preshave hair hydration and postshave moisturization do not worsen PFB.2 A recent study found that multiblade razor technology paired with use of a shave foam or gel actually improved skin appearance in patients with PFB.7

It is important to direct patients to shave in the direction of hair growth; however, this may not be possible for individuals with curly or coarse hair, as the hair may grow in many directions.8,9 Patients also should avoid pulling the skin taut while shaving, as doing so allows the hair to be clipped below the surface, where it can repenetrate the skin and cause further irritation. As an alternative to shaving with a razor, patients can use hair clippers to trim beard hair, which leaves behind stubble and interrupts the cycle of retracted hairs under the skin. Nd:YAG laser therapy has demonstrated efficacy in reduction of PFB papules and pustules.9-12 Greater mean improvement in inflammatory papules and reduction in hair density was noted in participants who received Nd:YAG laser plus eflornithine compared with those who received the laser or eflornithine alone.11 Patients should not pluck or dig into the skin to remove any ingrown hairs. If a tweezer is used, the patient should gently lift the tip of the ingrown hair with the tweezer to dislodge it from the skin and prevent plucking out the hair completely.

To help manage inflammation after shaving, topical treatments such as benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel can be used.3,13 A low-potency steroid such as topical hydrocortisone 2.5% applied once or twice daily for up to 2 to 3 days may be helpful.1,14 Adjunctive treatments including keratolytics (eg, topical retinoids, hydroxy acids) reduce perifollicular hyperkeratosis.14,15 Agents containing alpha hydroxy acids (eg, glycolic acid) also can decrease the curvature of the hair itself by reducing the sulfhydryl bonds.6 If secondary bacterial infections occur, oral antibiotics (eg, doxycycline) may be necessary.

Health Disparity Highlight

Individuals with darker skin tones are at higher risk for PFB and associated complications. Limited access to dermatology services may further exacerbate these challenges. Individuals with PFB may not seek medical treatment until the condition becomes severe. Clinicians also may underestimate the severity of PFB—particularly in those with darker skin tones—based on erythema alone because it may be less pronounced in darker vs lighter skin tones.16

While permanent hair reduction with laser therapy is a treatment option for PFB, it may be inaccessible to some patients because it can be expensive and is coded as a cosmetic procedure. Additionally, patients may not have access to specialists who are experienced in performing the procedure in those with darker skin tones.9 Some patients also may not want to permanently reduce the amount of hair that grows in the beard area for personal or religious reasons.17

Pseudofolliculitis barbae also has been linked to professional disparities. One study found that members of the US Air Force who had medical shaving waivers experienced longer times to promotion than those with no waiver.18 Delays in promotion may be linked to perceptions of unprofessionalism, exclusion from high-profile duties, and concerns about career progression. While this delay was similar for individuals of all races, the majority of those in the waiver group were Black/African American. In 2021, 4 Black firefighters with PFB were unsuccessful in their bid to get a medical accommodation regarding a New York City Fire Department policy requiring them to be clean shaven where the oxygen mask seals against the skin.5 More research is needed on mask safety and efficiency relative to the length of facial hair. Accommodations or tailored masks for facial hair conditions also are necessary so individuals with PFB can meet job requirements while managing their condition.

References
  1. Alexis A, Heath CR, Halder RM. Folliculitis keloidalis nuchae and pseudofolliculitis barbae: are prevention and effective treatment within reach? Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:183-191.
  2. Gray J, McMichael AJ. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: understanding the condition and the role of facial grooming. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):24-27.
  3. Tshudy MT, Cho S. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the U.S. military, a review. Mil Med. 2021;186:E52-E57.
  4. Jung I, Lannan FM, Weiss A, et al. Treatment and current policies on pseudofolliculitis barbae in the US military. Cutis. 2023;112:299-302.
  5. Jiang YR. Reasonable accommodation and disparate impact: clean shave policy discrimination in today’s workplace. J Law Med Ethics. 2023;51:185-195.
  6. Taylor SC, Barbosa V, Burgess C, et al. Hair and scalp disorders in adult and pediatric patients with skin of color. Cutis. 2017;100:31-35.
  7. Moran E, McMichael A, De Souza B, et al. New razor technology improves appearance and quality of life in men with pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2022;110:329-334.
  8. Maurer M, Rietzler M, Burghardt R, et al. The male beard hair and facial skin—challenges for shaving. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):3-9.
  9. Ross EV. How would you treat this patient with lasers & EBDs? casebased panel. Presented at: Skin of Color Update; September 13, 2024; New York, NY.
  10. Ross EV, Cooke LM, Timko AL, et al. Treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae in skin types IV, V, and VI with a long-pulsed neodymium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47:263-270.
  11. Shokeir H, Samy N, Taymour M. Pseudofolliculitis barbae treatment: efficacy of topical eflornithine, long-pulsed Nd-YAG laser versus their combination. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3517-3525.
  12. Amer A, Elsayed A, Gharib K. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of chemical peeling and long-pulse Nd:YAG laser in treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14859.
  13. Cook-Bolden FE, Barba A, Halder R, et al. Twice-daily applications of benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel versus vehicle in the treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2004;73(6 suppl):18-24.
  14. Nussbaum D, Friedman A. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: a review of current treatment options. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18:246-250.
  15. Quarles FN, Brody H, Johnson BA, et al. Pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2007;20:133-136.
  16. McMichael AJ, Frey C. Challenging the tools used to measure cutaneous lupus severity in patients of all skin types. JAMA Dermatol. 2025;161:9-10.
  17. Okonkwo E, Neal B, Harper HL. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the military and the need for social awareness. Mil Med. 2021;186:143-144.
  18. Ritchie S, Park J, Banta J, et al. Shaving waivers in the United States Air Force and their impact on promotions of Black/African-American members. Mil Med. 2023;188:E242-E247.
References
  1. Alexis A, Heath CR, Halder RM. Folliculitis keloidalis nuchae and pseudofolliculitis barbae: are prevention and effective treatment within reach? Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:183-191.
  2. Gray J, McMichael AJ. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: understanding the condition and the role of facial grooming. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):24-27.
  3. Tshudy MT, Cho S. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the U.S. military, a review. Mil Med. 2021;186:E52-E57.
  4. Jung I, Lannan FM, Weiss A, et al. Treatment and current policies on pseudofolliculitis barbae in the US military. Cutis. 2023;112:299-302.
  5. Jiang YR. Reasonable accommodation and disparate impact: clean shave policy discrimination in today’s workplace. J Law Med Ethics. 2023;51:185-195.
  6. Taylor SC, Barbosa V, Burgess C, et al. Hair and scalp disorders in adult and pediatric patients with skin of color. Cutis. 2017;100:31-35.
  7. Moran E, McMichael A, De Souza B, et al. New razor technology improves appearance and quality of life in men with pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2022;110:329-334.
  8. Maurer M, Rietzler M, Burghardt R, et al. The male beard hair and facial skin—challenges for shaving. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2016;38 (suppl 1):3-9.
  9. Ross EV. How would you treat this patient with lasers & EBDs? casebased panel. Presented at: Skin of Color Update; September 13, 2024; New York, NY.
  10. Ross EV, Cooke LM, Timko AL, et al. Treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae in skin types IV, V, and VI with a long-pulsed neodymium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002;47:263-270.
  11. Shokeir H, Samy N, Taymour M. Pseudofolliculitis barbae treatment: efficacy of topical eflornithine, long-pulsed Nd-YAG laser versus their combination. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3517-3525.
  12. Amer A, Elsayed A, Gharib K. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of chemical peeling and long-pulse Nd:YAG laser in treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2021;34:E14859.
  13. Cook-Bolden FE, Barba A, Halder R, et al. Twice-daily applications of benzoyl peroxide 5%/clindamycin 1% gel versus vehicle in the treatment of pseudofolliculitis barbae. Cutis. 2004;73(6 suppl):18-24.
  14. Nussbaum D, Friedman A. Pseudofolliculitis barbae: a review of current treatment options. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18:246-250.
  15. Quarles FN, Brody H, Johnson BA, et al. Pseudofolliculitis barbae. Dermatol Ther. 2007;20:133-136.
  16. McMichael AJ, Frey C. Challenging the tools used to measure cutaneous lupus severity in patients of all skin types. JAMA Dermatol. 2025;161:9-10.
  17. Okonkwo E, Neal B, Harper HL. Pseudofolliculitis barbae in the military and the need for social awareness. Mil Med. 2021;186:143-144.
  18. Ritchie S, Park J, Banta J, et al. Shaving waivers in the United States Air Force and their impact on promotions of Black/African-American members. Mil Med. 2023;188:E242-E247.
Issue
Federal Practitioner - 42(4)
Issue
Federal Practitioner - 42(4)
Page Number
1-2
Page Number
1-2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline

Beyond the Razor: Managing Pseudofolliculitis Barbae in Skin of Color

Display Headline

Beyond the Razor: Managing Pseudofolliculitis Barbae in Skin of Color

Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 16:29
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 16:29
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 16:29
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 16:29

Agitation and emotional lability

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 11:32

This patient’s presentation is indicative of moderate-stage Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which is confirmed by physical exam and testing; most notably, her MMSE score of 18 (a score of ≥ 25 is considered normal) and MRI results showing distinct cortical atrophy. At this stage of disease, signs and symptoms become more pronounced and widespread to include not only language deficiencies, prominent memory loss, and sensory processing, but also motor deficits and behavioral issues, all of which are clearly present in this patient.

A very important clinical consideration is a possible delay in diagnosis. It is atypical for an initial diagnosis of AD to be made when a patient is in the moderate stage of disease. This patient’s history over 5 years before her diagnosis included complaints of forgetfulness and low-level dyspraxia, which were not pursued. Reasons for this can vary. Broadly, patient interactions in a primary care setting tend to be brief, thus, many patients are not engaged in their care. Early symptoms — eg, memory impairment — can be missed during routine office visits.

There are also significant racial disparities in the diagnosis of dementia. According to National Institute of Aging-funded studies that were conducted in 39 AD Research Centers, White patients > 65 years old had a significantly higher prevalence of dementia diagnoses at baseline visits than Black patients in the same age group. Black patients, especially Black women, tend not to be diagnosed with AD until it has progressed. Conversely, Black patients had more risk factors for AD, greater cognitive impairment, and more severe neuropsychiatric symptoms (delusions and hallucinations) than those of other races and ethnicities.

Another barrier to timely diagnosis in Black patients is disparity in access to neuroimaging. In a study conducted by Wibecan and colleagues at Boston Medical Center, researchers found that among neuroimaging assessments conducted at the facility, Black patients who received MRI or CT scan for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment were older than White patients (72.5 years vs 67 years). Additionally, Black patients were significantly less likely to undergo MRI (the gold standard of care for dementia diagnosis) than CT scan.  

Hypothyroidism is an endocrine disorder that occurs because of a deficiency in thyroid hormone. Symptoms tend to be subtle and non-specific but vary greatly. Some of the hallmark symptoms are fatigue, weight gain, cold intolerance, dry skin, and hair loss. Additionally, emotional lability and depressed mood with mental impairment, slowed speech, and movement, as evident in this patient. However, hypothyroidism was ruled out when her laboratory results returned with all values within normal range.  

Vascular dementia is the second-most prevalent form of dementia after AD. It is characterized as cognitive impairment that occurs after one, or a series of, neurologic events and does not refer to a single disease but to a variety of vascular disorders. Patients with vascular dementia often exhibit mood and behavioral changes, deficits in executive function, and severe memory loss, all of which are present in this patient. However, as there were no (known) neurologic events in this patient — and no evidence thereof on imaging — and her hypertension is relatively well controlled, this is not a diagnostic consideration for this patient.  

Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is caused by the build-up of cerebrospinal fluid in the brain. It is characterized by abnormal gait, dementia, and urinary incontinence. Patients with NPH experience decreased attention, significant memory loss, bradyphrenia, bradykinesia, and broad-based gait, all of which feature in this patient. However, brain MRI was negative for structural abnormalities of this type, and there was no indication of NPH, which rules it out as a potential diagnosis.  

 

Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, Chief of Pain Management, Carilion Clinic and Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, Virginia.

Disclosure: Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections

This patient’s presentation is indicative of moderate-stage Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which is confirmed by physical exam and testing; most notably, her MMSE score of 18 (a score of ≥ 25 is considered normal) and MRI results showing distinct cortical atrophy. At this stage of disease, signs and symptoms become more pronounced and widespread to include not only language deficiencies, prominent memory loss, and sensory processing, but also motor deficits and behavioral issues, all of which are clearly present in this patient.

A very important clinical consideration is a possible delay in diagnosis. It is atypical for an initial diagnosis of AD to be made when a patient is in the moderate stage of disease. This patient’s history over 5 years before her diagnosis included complaints of forgetfulness and low-level dyspraxia, which were not pursued. Reasons for this can vary. Broadly, patient interactions in a primary care setting tend to be brief, thus, many patients are not engaged in their care. Early symptoms — eg, memory impairment — can be missed during routine office visits.

There are also significant racial disparities in the diagnosis of dementia. According to National Institute of Aging-funded studies that were conducted in 39 AD Research Centers, White patients > 65 years old had a significantly higher prevalence of dementia diagnoses at baseline visits than Black patients in the same age group. Black patients, especially Black women, tend not to be diagnosed with AD until it has progressed. Conversely, Black patients had more risk factors for AD, greater cognitive impairment, and more severe neuropsychiatric symptoms (delusions and hallucinations) than those of other races and ethnicities.

Another barrier to timely diagnosis in Black patients is disparity in access to neuroimaging. In a study conducted by Wibecan and colleagues at Boston Medical Center, researchers found that among neuroimaging assessments conducted at the facility, Black patients who received MRI or CT scan for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment were older than White patients (72.5 years vs 67 years). Additionally, Black patients were significantly less likely to undergo MRI (the gold standard of care for dementia diagnosis) than CT scan.  

Hypothyroidism is an endocrine disorder that occurs because of a deficiency in thyroid hormone. Symptoms tend to be subtle and non-specific but vary greatly. Some of the hallmark symptoms are fatigue, weight gain, cold intolerance, dry skin, and hair loss. Additionally, emotional lability and depressed mood with mental impairment, slowed speech, and movement, as evident in this patient. However, hypothyroidism was ruled out when her laboratory results returned with all values within normal range.  

Vascular dementia is the second-most prevalent form of dementia after AD. It is characterized as cognitive impairment that occurs after one, or a series of, neurologic events and does not refer to a single disease but to a variety of vascular disorders. Patients with vascular dementia often exhibit mood and behavioral changes, deficits in executive function, and severe memory loss, all of which are present in this patient. However, as there were no (known) neurologic events in this patient — and no evidence thereof on imaging — and her hypertension is relatively well controlled, this is not a diagnostic consideration for this patient.  

Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is caused by the build-up of cerebrospinal fluid in the brain. It is characterized by abnormal gait, dementia, and urinary incontinence. Patients with NPH experience decreased attention, significant memory loss, bradyphrenia, bradykinesia, and broad-based gait, all of which feature in this patient. However, brain MRI was negative for structural abnormalities of this type, and there was no indication of NPH, which rules it out as a potential diagnosis.  

 

Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, Chief of Pain Management, Carilion Clinic and Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, Virginia.

Disclosure: Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.
 

This patient’s presentation is indicative of moderate-stage Alzheimer’s disease (AD), which is confirmed by physical exam and testing; most notably, her MMSE score of 18 (a score of ≥ 25 is considered normal) and MRI results showing distinct cortical atrophy. At this stage of disease, signs and symptoms become more pronounced and widespread to include not only language deficiencies, prominent memory loss, and sensory processing, but also motor deficits and behavioral issues, all of which are clearly present in this patient.

A very important clinical consideration is a possible delay in diagnosis. It is atypical for an initial diagnosis of AD to be made when a patient is in the moderate stage of disease. This patient’s history over 5 years before her diagnosis included complaints of forgetfulness and low-level dyspraxia, which were not pursued. Reasons for this can vary. Broadly, patient interactions in a primary care setting tend to be brief, thus, many patients are not engaged in their care. Early symptoms — eg, memory impairment — can be missed during routine office visits.

There are also significant racial disparities in the diagnosis of dementia. According to National Institute of Aging-funded studies that were conducted in 39 AD Research Centers, White patients > 65 years old had a significantly higher prevalence of dementia diagnoses at baseline visits than Black patients in the same age group. Black patients, especially Black women, tend not to be diagnosed with AD until it has progressed. Conversely, Black patients had more risk factors for AD, greater cognitive impairment, and more severe neuropsychiatric symptoms (delusions and hallucinations) than those of other races and ethnicities.

Another barrier to timely diagnosis in Black patients is disparity in access to neuroimaging. In a study conducted by Wibecan and colleagues at Boston Medical Center, researchers found that among neuroimaging assessments conducted at the facility, Black patients who received MRI or CT scan for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment were older than White patients (72.5 years vs 67 years). Additionally, Black patients were significantly less likely to undergo MRI (the gold standard of care for dementia diagnosis) than CT scan.  

Hypothyroidism is an endocrine disorder that occurs because of a deficiency in thyroid hormone. Symptoms tend to be subtle and non-specific but vary greatly. Some of the hallmark symptoms are fatigue, weight gain, cold intolerance, dry skin, and hair loss. Additionally, emotional lability and depressed mood with mental impairment, slowed speech, and movement, as evident in this patient. However, hypothyroidism was ruled out when her laboratory results returned with all values within normal range.  

Vascular dementia is the second-most prevalent form of dementia after AD. It is characterized as cognitive impairment that occurs after one, or a series of, neurologic events and does not refer to a single disease but to a variety of vascular disorders. Patients with vascular dementia often exhibit mood and behavioral changes, deficits in executive function, and severe memory loss, all of which are present in this patient. However, as there were no (known) neurologic events in this patient — and no evidence thereof on imaging — and her hypertension is relatively well controlled, this is not a diagnostic consideration for this patient.  

Normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) is caused by the build-up of cerebrospinal fluid in the brain. It is characterized by abnormal gait, dementia, and urinary incontinence. Patients with NPH experience decreased attention, significant memory loss, bradyphrenia, bradykinesia, and broad-based gait, all of which feature in this patient. However, brain MRI was negative for structural abnormalities of this type, and there was no indication of NPH, which rules it out as a potential diagnosis.  

 

Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, Chief of Pain Management, Carilion Clinic and Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke, Virginia.

Disclosure: Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, MS, MEd, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Questionnaire Body

A 76-year-old Black woman presents to her physician. She is accompanied by her daughter who reports that, over the last 9 months, her mother has exhibited worsening memory loss, confusion, impaired judgment, agitation, and emotional lability. She is often unaware of where she is or how she got there. She sometimes does not recognize her family members or people who are familiar to her. Her appetite has been variable, and her sleep schedule is altered so that she often sleeps during the day and is awake at night. Sometimes, she is so irritable that she becomes aggressive and insists on situations that don’t exist. Her executive function is low. Her daughter reports that the patient had a fall 9 months ago and again 4 months ago, after which her symptoms became progressively worse.

The patient has complained about being forgetful and clumsy for much of the past 5 years, which she has attributed to old age. Until the last year or so, these have not greatly impaired her daily function and were not of great concern to her family or providers. She has a history of hypertension and diabetes, both of which are pharmacologically managed with mixed results due to variable adherence.

Physical exam confirms her daughter’s report. The patient appears thin, fatigued, and anxious. She has lost 20 lb since her last visit. She has great difficulty maintaining focus on what is being asked of her and in following the conversation. When she does speak, her speech is slow. She exhibits both motor deficits — in balance and coordination — and a bradykinetic gait.

Laboratory testing is performed: complete blood count w/diff, comprehensive metabolic panel, thyroid panel, cobalamin level, vitamin D screening. All results are within normal range for this patient. She was unable to complete the Geriatric Depression Scale on her own; direct questioning about whether she was feeling depressed is negative. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score is 18. MRI is performed; sagittal view reveals cortical atrophy. 

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 13:25
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 13:25
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 13:25
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
survey writer start date
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 13:25