Literature DB >> 21049212

Inpatient dermatological consultations in a university hospital.

Suzana Mancusi1, Cyro Festa Neto.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Dermatology is primarily an outpatient specialty, but it also plays an important role in the care of inpatients.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective study that recorded data from inpatient dermatology consultation request forms over a period of four months. The study evaluated 313 requests that led to 566 visits, 86 biopsies, 35 laboratory exams, 41 direct microscopic studies, 18 direct immunofluorescence analyses, 14 skin cultures and a few other exams.
RESULTS: The most frequent requesting service was internal medicine (24%), followed by neurology (12%), cardiology (11%), infectious diseases and pediatrics (8% each) and psychiatry and general surgery (6% each). The most frequent diagnostic groups were infectious diseases (25%, divided into fungal infections (13%), bacterial infections (7%) and viral infections (5%)), eczemas (15%) and drug reactions (14%). To our knowledge, this is the first study to attempt to evaluate the impact of the consultations by asking multiple-choice questions that were analyzed by the authors. In 31% of the cases, the consultation was considered extremely relevant because it aided in managing the disease that led to admission or treated a potentially severe dermatological disease. In 58% of the cases, the consultation was considered important because it facilitated diagnosis and/or treatment of a dermatological disease that was unrelated to the reason for admission.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21049212      PMCID: PMC2954736          DOI: 10.1590/s1807-59322010000900007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)        ISSN: 1807-5932            Impact factor:   2.365


INTRODUCTION

Dermatology is primarily an outpatient clinical and surgical specialty, but it also plays important roles in the care of inpatients who are admitted to dermatology beds and other services.1-3 With the advent of effective and more cosmetically acceptable creams and phototherapy, the patterns of inpatient care are undergoing changes; in addition, the introduction of oral immunosuppressive agents has broadened the scope of outpatient therapy.3 As a result of the changing conditions of medical care, the number of patients admitted to dermatology services is decreasing, while the value of dermatologists as consultants within the hospital setting is increasing.1 Approximately 20% of the general population have skin diseases that are treated by local or systemic therapies, and therefore, it seems clear that inpatients would suffer numerous skin complaints regardless of the disease that led to hospitalization.1

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective study that recorded data from hospital dermatology consultation request forms over a period of four months (from November 2009 to February 2010). These data included the demographics of each patient for whom the consultation was requested, the requesting service, the provisional dermatological diagnosis of the referring service, the diagnostic tests performed, the date when the consultation were requested, the date of the first visit, the number of visits, the need for follow‐up by any dermatology department, the final dermatological diagnosis, the number of visits per patient and two multiple‐choice questions that were analyzed by the authors to evaluate the impact of each consultation. These data were systematically entered into a database for further analysis.

RESULTS

We evaluated 313 requests for consultation that led to 566 visits, 86 biopsies, 35 laboratory exams, 41 direct microscopic studies, 18 direct immunofluorescence analyses, 14 skin cultures, 8 requests for evaluation from other clinics, 5 ultrasonographies and 3 other procedures (dermatoscopy, radiography(RX) and indirect immunofluorescence analysis). For 169 consultations (54%), complaints were resolved with a single visit, 89 consultations (28%) required two visits, and 55 consultations (17%) required 3 or more visits. The patient group comprised 51% females and 49% males and demonstrated an average age of 45 yrs (SD = 22). The average number of visits per request was 1.8. The average delay between the consultation request and the consultation visit was 0.45 days. The most frequent requesting services were internal medicine (24% of requests), neurology (12%), cardiology (11%), infectious diseases and pediatrics (8% each), psychiatry and general surgery (6% each), oncology and obstetrics (4% each) and other clinics (19%) (Table 1). Consultations were requested for 84% of nursery patients and 16% of patients in intensive care units. Regarding the physicians who requested the consultations, 55% presented diagnosis hypotheses, and 33% provided correct hypotheses. The most frequent diagnosis hypotheses were drug reactions (16%), 81% of which were correct. In addition, 19% of the physicians had started treatment for skin conditions before requesting consultations.
Table 1

Referral services and most frequent diagnosis by service.

ServiceTotal%First diagnosis by servicen% of total consultations
Internal medicine7624Infectious and parasitic diseases206.3
 Fungal infection92.8
 Bacterial infection82.5
 Herpes infection30.9
Neurology3612Drug reactions113.5
Cardiology3311Eczematous diseases82.5
 Contact dermatitis41.2
 Stasis dermatitis20.6
 Atopic dermatitis10.3
 Xerosis10.3
Infectious diseases258Infectious and parasitic diseases103.1
 Fungal infections51.5
 Herpes infections51.5
Pediatrics248Eczematous diseases51.5
 Atopic dermatitis41.2
 Seborrheic dermatitis10.3
Psychiatry206Eczematous diseases61.9
 Contact dermatitis20.6
 Atopic dermatitis20.6
 Seborrheic dermatitis10.3
 Lichen simplex chronicus10.3
General surgery196Drug reactions82.5
Oncology124Infectious and parasitic diseases51.5
 Bacterial infection41.2
 Fungal infection10.3
Obstetrics and gynecology14Eczematous diseases61.9
 Seborrheic dermatitis20.6
 Atopic dermatitis10.3
 Contact dermatitis10.3
 Stasis dermatitis10.3
Rheumatology93Connective tissue diseases51.5
 Dermatomyositis20.6
 Nonspecific connective tissue diseases30.9
Endocrinology83Infectious and parasitic diseases30.9
 Bacterial infection20.6
 Fungal infection10.3
Hematology83Drug reactions30.9
Urology72Infectious and parasitic diseases30.9
 Scabiosis20.6
 Bacterial infections10.3
Orthopedics52Drug reaction20.6
Pulmonology41Acne eruption/bullous disease/psoriasis/drug reaction1/1/1/10.3/0.3/0.3
Nephrology41Pruritus20.6
Gastrosurgery31Eczematous diseases20.6
 Seborrheic dermatitis10.3
 Contact dermatitis10.3
Immunology31Connective tissue diseases20.6
 Lupus Erythematosus10.3
 Nonspecific connective tissue diseases10.3
Others: otorhinolaryngologist, plastic, vascular31Fungal infections20.6
With respect to the examined patients, 7% were already patients in the department of dermatology at the university hospital, 4% had undergone dermatological follow‐up visits in a basic unit heath care, and 89% had undergone no dermatological follow‐up visits. Regarding the patient complaints that led to the consultation requests, 64% had occurred prior to admission, and 36% occurred after admission; 17% of the patients were admitted in a hospital bed because of their skin conditions. The most frequent diagnostic groups were infectious diseases (26.8%, divided into fungal infections (13%), bacterial infections (7.9%) and viral infections (5.4%)), eczemas (16.6%), drug reactions (14%), and other, less frequent, diagnoses, as shown in Table 2. Among the consultations, 19% found skin manifestations due to systemic diseases, and in 7% of the requests, the consultation aided in the diagnosis of a systemic disease. In addition, 19% of the complaints were found to be skin side effects of systemic treatments. Regarding the treatments suggested by the consultations, 17% of the requests required no treatment, 10% needed further investigation before beginning a specific treatment, 27% needed topical treatments, 45% required systemic treatments, and 2% were transferred to a dermatology bed for closer monitoring and treatment.
Table 2

Dermatological Diagnoses.

DiseaseTotal%DiseaseTotal%
Infectious and parasitic diseases8426.8Connective tissue diseases154.7
 Fungal infections4012.7 Lupus erythematosus51.5
 Bacterial infections257.9 Dermatomyositis41.2
 Viral infections175.4 Nonspecific Connective tissue diseases61.9
 Scabiosis20.6
 Pediculosis10.3Psoriasis92.8
 Chagas disease10.3Traumatic diseases92.8
Eczematous diseases5216.6Vasculopathy diseases82.5
 Contact dermatitis206.3Pruritus61.9
 Atopic dermatitis82.5Bullous diseases51.5
 Stasis dermatitis82.5Ecchymosis51.5
 Seborrheic dermatitis72.2Neurotic excoriations41.2
 Lichen simplex chronicus61.9Acne eruptions41.2
 Xerosis30.9Alopecia Areata30.9
Drug reactions4414.0Chronic skin ulcers30.9
Neoplasms216.7Darier’s Disease20.6
 Benign neoplasms144.4Zinc Deficiency20.6
 Metastases to the skin41.2Unable to reach diagnosisbefore discharge154.7
 Malignant skin neoplasms30.9
Others206.3
On discharge, 30% of the patients were advised to attend a follow‐up visit with the dermatology service of the discharging hospital, 9% of the patients were advised to attend a follow‐up visit with a dermatologist from a basic heath care unit, and 61% did not require a follow‐up visit. To evaluate the impact of the consultations, several questions were asked about each consultation (Table 3), and the answers were analyzed by the authors. For the question “what was the relevance of the consultation for the admited patient,” the most frequent answer was “important, it aided in a diagnosis and/or treatment of a dermatologic disease that was unrelated to the reason for admission” in 58% of cases; in 31% of cases, the consultation was considered extremely relevant because it helped to achieve a diagnosis and/or modified the treatment of the disease that led to admission. When asked whether patient treatment would be affected negatively if there was no dermatological consultation available, the most frequent answer was “slightly, the patient would have suffered longer with the dermatological complaint until an outpatient consultation was available” in 48% of cases, followed by “yes, a systemic disease would not have been diagnosed or a potentially severe dermatologic disease would not have been treated” in 31% of cases. In 21% of cases, there were no need for an emergency dermatological evaluation, or the dermatological consultation did not modify the treatment.
Table 3

Questions used to evaluate the impact of dermatological consultations.

What was the relevance of the consultation for the admitted patient?n%
A) Extremely relevant, it helped to achieve a diagnosis and/or changed the treatment of the disease that led to admission.9831
B) Important, it aided in a diagnosis and/or treatment of a dermatologic disease that was unrelated to the reason for admission.18058
C) It was not important.3511
Would patient treatment be negatively impacted if there was no dermatological consultation available?n%
A) Yes, a systemic disease would not have been diagnosed or a potentially severe dermatologic disease would not have been treated.9731
B) Slightly, the patient would have suffered longer with the dermatologic complaint until an outpatient consultation was available.15048
C) No, there were no need for an emergency dermatologic evaluation, or the dermatologic consultation did not modify the treatment.6621

DISCUSSION

Dermatology is primarily an outpatient specialty, but it also plays an important role in the hospital setting. Due to ongoing changes in the patterns of inpatient care, dermatologists have become increasingly valuable as consultants in the hospital setting. Therefore, it is becoming more important to study the role of the dermatologistin this context. A literature search yielded nine relevant articles (Table 4)1,4-11, of which one included inpatients and outpatients10 and another involved patients who were referred from internal medicine departments.11 Although the length of our study period was shorter than those used in other reports, the data obtained from this study are consistent with these other reports. Of the studies available, only Fisher et al.8 and Penãte et al.1 recorded the number of visits for each patient; 85.7% and 71.8% of complaints, respectively, were resolved with a single visit. Our study also showed that one visit was sufficient for a majority of patients (58%), which suggested that most complaints corresponded to common diseases for which a clinical diagnosis was sufficient to enable treatment by the referring physician. This finding was consistent with the observation that only 39% of the patients required dermatological follow‐up visits after discharge from the hospital, which suggested that most of the diagnosed conditions were resolved with appropriate treatments.
Table 4

Literature Review.1,4-11

Author [ref.]Institution/ city/countryTotalStudy period monthsServices with the highest demandMost frequent diagnoses
Sherertz4Gainesville Hospitals70012Not availableSystemic diseases manifestations 9.4%
USADrug reaction/Dermatitis 9.2%
Superficial dermatophyte/Candida 9.1%
Hardwick5Groote Schuur Hospital50016Internal medicine 45.6%Dermatitis 17.1%
Cape observatoryGeneral surgery 10.6%Drug reaction 10.5%
South AfricaObst & Gyn 8.4%Superficial fungal infections 7.0%
Falanga6Jackson Memorial Hospital5918Medicine 39%Miscellaneous 48%
MiamiEmergency 16%Drug eruption 8.8%
USAPediatrics 14%Atopic dermatitis 5.1%
Itin7Kantonssopital59412Internal medicine >50%Infections 21.7%
ArauDrug reactions 9.8%
SwitzerlandFungal infections 8.9%
Fischer8University Hospital239024Internal medicine 42.8%Infections 24.4%
HallePediatrics 11.7%Candidiasis 23.9%
GermanyNeurology 9.9%Allergic dermatitis 9.2%
Eczema 12.4%
Walia9158 Base Hospital97160Surgery 29.8%Allergic/vascular reactions 30.2%
SecunderabadMedicine 29.7%Infections 29.8%
IndiaPsychiatry 16.4%Papulosquamous 9.7%
Penãte1Hospital Insular314496Internal medicine 21.5%Contact dermatitis 8.9%
Las PalmasPediatrics 11.4%Drug eruption 7.4%
SpainNeurology 8.3%Candidiasis 7.1%
Arora2,10Base Hospital662Internal medicine 49.8%Systemic diseases manifestations 23%
DelhiSurgery 22.7%Drug eruption 9.1%
IndiaPediatrics 9.8%
Antic11Kantonssopital129036Only data from internal medicine and subspecialtiesEczema 12.6%
ArauCutaneous precancerosis 6.2%
SwitzerlandDrug eruption 4.2%
Present studyHospital das Clinicas FMUSP3134Internal medicine 24%Infectious and parasitic
Sao PauloNeurology 12%diseases 25.8%
BrazilCardiology 11%Eczematous diseases 16.6%
Drug reaction 14%

2832 cases with diagnosis, and 3097 cases with referral service.

Study of inpatients and outpatients referred to dermatology by other medical services.

In the present study, as well as in other published studies1,5,7,9, internal medicine placed the heaviest demand on dermatological requests. In terms of demand, internal medicine was followed by pediatrics, neurology and psychiatry in most studies6,8, which differs slightly from the findings of our study in which cardiology and infectious diseases also played important roles. The substantial number of requests made by internal medicine, pediatrics, cardiology and psychiatry correlated with the number of patients admitted to their care. The consultations from neurology were due to the observation that most of their patients were bedridden and that neuroleptic drugs are frequent causes of drug reactions, which was the most frequent diagnosis for neurology patients. The number of diagnostic tests requested by dermatology in referred patients varies widely among different studies, ranging from 48% in our study to 34.6% in Falanga et al.6 and to 6.4% in Penãte et al.1 The most frequent diagnoses in our literature review were infections, dermatitis and drug reactions1,5,7,8, which were also the most common diagnoses in our study. The prevalence of eczematous dermatitis is likely due to the observation that this condition is one of the most common complaints of dermatology outpatients12 and because upon hospital admission, the patient is confined to a bed and is exposed to sweating, antiseptics, dressing occlusion, diapers and monitoring with catheters or pressures tubes. Skin infections are frequent in the outpatient setting12 but are even more prevalent in inpatients, probably due to the immunosuppression of some patients and the presentation of skin infections as a common reason for patient admission. The prevalence of drug reactions can be explained by the large amounts of drugs received by patients during admission, especially analgesics, non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatories and neuroleptics, which frequently trigger drug reactions. To our knowledge, this is the first study that has attempted to evaluate the effects of dermatological consultations via multiple‐choice questions. Most consultations were related to complaints that had occurred prior to admission and likely would have been resolved in the outpatient setting if the patient had scheduled a dermatological appointment. However, in almost one‐third of the consultations, the dermatologist facilitated management of the disease that led to admission or treated a potentially severe dermatologic disease, which demonstrates the importance of the dermatologist as a consultant in the hospital setting.
  11 in total

1.  Dermatologists in hospital wards: an 8-year study of dermatology consultations.

Authors:  Yeray Peñate; Noemi Guillermo; Priti Melwani; Rosa Martel; Leopoldo Borrego
Journal:  Dermatology       Date:  2009-07-31       Impact factor: 5.366

2.  Inpatient dermatology consultations at a medical center.

Authors:  E F Sherertz
Journal:  Arch Dermatol       Date:  1984-09

Review 3.  Inpatient dermatology consultation.

Authors:  G T Nahass
Journal:  Dermatol Clin       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.478

4.  Inpatient dermatology. A prescription for survival.

Authors:  S Prodanovich; R S Kirsner; F A Kerdel
Journal:  Dermatol Clin       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.478

5.  Patterns of dermatology referrals in a general hospital.

Authors:  N Hardwick; N Saxe
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 9.302

6.  Teaching effects of dermatological consultations on nondermatologists in the field of internal medicine. A study of 1290 inpatients.

Authors:  Milos Antic; Dieter Conen; Peter H Itin
Journal:  Dermatology       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 5.366

7.  [The dermatologic consultation].

Authors:  M Fischer; H Bergert; W C Marsch
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 0.751

8.  Prevalence of skin diseases in a cohort of 48,665 employees in Germany.

Authors:  I Schaefer; S J Rustenbach; L Zimmer; M Augustin
Journal:  Dermatology       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 5.366

9.  Analysis of dermatological referrals (a series of 662 cases from base and army hospital complex).

Authors:  P N Arora; S K Aggarwal; K R Ramakrishnan
Journal:  Indian J Dermatol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 1.494

10.  Dermatology referrals in the hospital setting.

Authors:  N S Walia; S Deb
Journal:  Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.545

View more
  11 in total

1.  Inflammatory dermatoses, infections, and drug eruptions are the most common skin conditions in hospitalized cancer patients.

Authors:  Gregory S Phillips; Azael Freites-Martinez; Meier Hsu; Anna Skripnik Lucas; Dulce M Barrios; Kathryn Ciccolini; Michael A Marchetti; Liang Deng; Patricia L Myskowski; Erica H Lee; Alina Markova; Mario E Lacouture
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 11.527

2.  Pattern of Inpatient Dermatology Consultations in a Tertiary Care Centre from Northern India.

Authors:  Abhilasha Williams; Anuradha Bhatia; Bimal Kanish; Paulina Rose Chaudhary; Clarence James Samuel
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-12-01

3.  Reasons for inpatient dermatological consultation requested by other specialities: a five-year data analysis of 1,052 patients from a Portuguese tertiary teaching hospital

Authors:  Dora Mancha; Ângela Roda; Catarina Queirós; Pedro Garrido; Paulo Filipe
Journal:  Eur J Dermatol       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 2.805

4.  Dermatology, an interdisciplinary approach between community and hospital care.

Authors:  Soudeh Mashayekhi; Reza Hajhosseiny
Journal:  JRSM Short Rep       Date:  2013-06-05

5.  Profile of patients admitted to a triage dermatology clinic at a tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil.

Authors:  Fernanda Bertanha; Erica Judite Pimentel Nelumba; Alyne Korukian Freiberg; Luciana Paula Samorano; Cyro Festa
Journal:  An Bras Dermatol       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.896

6.  Pattern of inpatient referrals to dermatology at a tertiary care centre of South Rajasthan.

Authors:  Manisha Balai; Lalit K Gupta; Ashok K Khare; Asit Mittal; Sharad Mehta; Garima Bharti
Journal:  Indian Dermatol Online J       Date:  2017 Jan-Feb

7.  Pattern of Dermatological Disease Encountered in a Hematology Ward: A Retrospective Analysis of Dermatology Consultation in a Hematology Ward in a Tertiary Care Center in Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Amal Aboud Alasmari; Anadel Hassan Hakeem; Fatemah Saleh Bin Saleh; Shahad Yousef Alsaigh; Waleed Al Ajroush; Laila Ali Layqah; Salim Alawi Baharoon
Journal:  Dermatol Res Pract       Date:  2019-01-13

8.  Dermatology residency research policies: A 2021 national survey.

Authors:  Pratibha Anand; Mindy D Szeto; Hania Flaten; Josephine D'Angelo; Cory A Dunnick; Robert P Dellavalle
Journal:  Int J Womens Dermatol       Date:  2021-05-24

9.  A retrospective analysis of dermatological problems in a hematology ward.

Authors:  Hy Koh
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol       Date:  2013-06-04

10.  A Retrospective Study to Evaluate the Impact of In-Patient Dermatological Consultations on Diagnostic Accuracy in a Tertiary Care Setting.

Authors:  Keshavamurthy Vinay; Vishal Thakur; Rajat Choudhary; Anubha Dev; Debajyoti Chatterjee; Sanjeev Handa
Journal:  Indian Dermatol Online J       Date:  2021-05-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.