Susan M Swetter1,2, Julia Chang1,2, Amanda R Shaub1,2, Martin A Weinstock3,4, Eleanor T Lewis5, Steven M Asch5,6. 1. Dermatology Service, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 2. Department of Dermatology, Pigmented Lesion and Melanoma Program, Stanford University Medical Center and Cancer Institute, Stanford, California. 3. Center for Dermatoepidemiology, Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island. 4. Department of Dermatology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 5. Center for Innovation to Implementation, Health Services Research and Development, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 6. Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California.
Abstract
Importance: Skin cancer screening may improve melanoma outcomes and keratinocyte carcinoma morbidity, but little is known about the feasibility of skin cancer training and clinical skin examination (CSE) by primary care practitioners (PCPs) in large health care systems. Objective: To assess the association of skin cancer training and screening by PCPs with dermatology referral patterns and rates of skin biopsies. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this pilot interventional study performed at the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, patients 35 years or older scheduled for an annual health habits screen in the PCP general medicine clinics were studied. Interventions: Six PCPs underwent Internet Curriculum for Melanoma Early Detection (INFORMED) training in May 2015, and 5 screened patients during the following 14 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of dermatology referrals, subsequent skin biopsies, and PCP diagnostic accuracy for skin cancer or precancer compared with dermatologist diagnosis were assessed in screened patients 14 months before the intervention (February 18, 2014, through April 30, 2015) and after the intervention (June 18, 2015, through August 30, 2016). Results: Among 258 patients offered screening (median age, 70 years; age range, 35-94 years; 255 [98.8%] male), 189 (73.3%) received CSE and 69 (26.7%) declined. A total of 62 of 189 patients (32.8%) were referred to a dermatologist after intervention: 33 (53.2%) for presumptive skin cancers and 15 (24.2%) for precancers. Nine of 50 patients (18.0%) evaluated in dermatology clinic underwent biopsy to exclude skin cancer. Correct diagnoses were made by PCPs in 13 of 38 patients (34.2%; 4 of 27 patients [14.8%] diagnosed with skin cancers and 5 of 11 patients [45.5%] diagnosed with actinic keratoses). Comparison of all outpatient visits for the 5 main participating PCPs before vs after intervention revealed no significant differences in dermatology referrals overall and those for presumptive skin cancer or actinic keratoses, skin biopsies, or PCP diagnostic accuracy with the exception of significantly fewer postintervention dermatology referrals that lacked specific diagnoses (25 [1.0%] vs 10 [0.4%], P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: This pilot study suggests that PCP-based skin cancer training and screening are feasible and have the potential to improve PCP diagnostic accuracy without increasing specialty referrals or skin biopsies. Additional studies comparing screening rates, specialty referrals, and patient outcomes in trained vs untrained PCPs are needed before screening is widely implemented in large health care systems in the United States.
Importance: Skin cancer screening may improve melanoma outcomes and keratinocyte carcinoma morbidity, but little is known about the feasibility of skin cancer training and clinical skin examination (CSE) by primary care practitioners (PCPs) in large health care systems. Objective: To assess the association of skin cancer training and screening by PCPs with dermatology referral patterns and rates of skin biopsies. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this pilot interventional study performed at the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, patients 35 years or older scheduled for an annual health habits screen in the PCP general medicine clinics were studied. Interventions: Six PCPs underwent Internet Curriculum for Melanoma Early Detection (INFORMED) training in May 2015, and 5 screened patients during the following 14 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of dermatology referrals, subsequent skin biopsies, and PCP diagnostic accuracy for skin cancer or precancer compared with dermatologist diagnosis were assessed in screened patients 14 months before the intervention (February 18, 2014, through April 30, 2015) and after the intervention (June 18, 2015, through August 30, 2016). Results: Among 258 patients offered screening (median age, 70 years; age range, 35-94 years; 255 [98.8%] male), 189 (73.3%) received CSE and 69 (26.7%) declined. A total of 62 of 189 patients (32.8%) were referred to a dermatologist after intervention: 33 (53.2%) for presumptive skin cancers and 15 (24.2%) for precancers. Nine of 50 patients (18.0%) evaluated in dermatology clinic underwent biopsy to exclude skin cancer. Correct diagnoses were made by PCPs in 13 of 38 patients (34.2%; 4 of 27 patients [14.8%] diagnosed with skin cancers and 5 of 11 patients [45.5%] diagnosed with actinic keratoses). Comparison of all outpatient visits for the 5 main participating PCPs before vs after intervention revealed no significant differences in dermatology referrals overall and those for presumptive skin cancer or actinic keratoses, skin biopsies, or PCP diagnostic accuracy with the exception of significantly fewer postintervention dermatology referrals that lacked specific diagnoses (25 [1.0%] vs 10 [0.4%], P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: This pilot study suggests that PCP-based skin cancer training and screening are feasible and have the potential to improve PCP diagnostic accuracy without increasing specialty referrals or skin biopsies. Additional studies comparing screening rates, specialty referrals, and patient outcomes in trained vs untrained PCPs are needed before screening is widely implemented in large health care systems in the United States.
Authors: Martin A Weinstock; Laura K Ferris; Melissa I Saul; Alan C Geller; Patricia M Risica; Julia A Siegel; Francis X Solano; John M Kirkwood Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Melody J Eide; Maryam M Asgari; Suzanne W Fletcher; Alan C Geller; Allan C Halpern; Waqas R Shaikh; Lingling Li; Gwen L Alexander; Andrea Altschuler; Stephen W Dusza; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Elizabeth A Quigley; Martin A Weinstock Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2013 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Alexander Katalinic; Annika Waldmann; Martin A Weinstock; Alan C Geller; Nora Eisemann; Ruediger Greinert; Beate Volkmer; Eckhard Breitbart Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-04-19 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: L Ebony Boulware; Spyridon Marinopoulos; Karran A Phillips; Constance W Hwang; Kenric Maynor; Dan Merenstein; Renee F Wilson; George J Barnes; Eric B Bass; Neil R Powe; Gail L Daumit Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-02-20 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Laura K Ferris; Melissa I Saul; Yan Lin; Fei Ding; Martin A Weinstock; Alan C Geller; Jian-Min Yuan; Erica Neuren; Spandana Maddukuri; Francis X Solano; John M Kirkwood Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; David C Grossman; Susan J Curry; Karina W Davidson; Mark Ebell; John W Epling; Francisco A R García; Matthew W Gillman; Alex R Kemper; Alex H Krist; Ann E Kurth; C Seth Landefeld; Carol M Mangione; William R Phillips; Maureen G Phipps; Michael P Pignone; Albert L Siu Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthew L Maciejewski; Mark Perkins; Yu-Fang Li; Michael Chapko; John C Fortney; Chuan-Fen Liu Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2007-04-18 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Martha Matsumoto; Aaron Secrest; Alyce Anderson; Melissa I Saul; Jonhan Ho; John M Kirkwood; Laura K Ferris Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2017-11-24 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Ashley E Brown; Maleka Najmi; Taylor Duke; Daniel A Grabell; Misha V Koshelev; Kelly C Nelson Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: E Marra; M C J van Rijsingen; J A C Alkemade; J M M Groenewoud; K F Hueskes; C H M Nij Bijvank; F A van de Laar; S F K Lubeek Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2020-07-13 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Saro H Armenian; Lanie Lindenfeld; Aleksi Iukuridze; Meagan Echevarria; Samantha Bebel; Catherine Coleman; Ryotaro Nakamura; Farah Abdullah; Badri Modi; Kevin C Oeffinger; Karen M Emmons; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Alan C Geller Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 4.430