Search

Dermatology is one of the least diverse medical specialties. Although there have been studies addressing barriers faced by underrepresented in medicine (UIM) applicants to dermatology, there is little information about how UIM applicants approach and fare in the dermatology residency match process. This study aimed to assess differences between UIM and non-UIM applicants in the dermatology match process. A survey was administered to 2020-2021 dermatology applicants (N=232) to evaluate applicant characteristics, approaches, and outcomes in the match process. Survey responses were analyzed to determine if differences between variables were statistically significant. An additional survey was administered to dermatology residency program directors to evaluate their approach to the 2020-2021 application process. Our findings are important in identifying interventions to improve equity in the dermatology application process and to improve diversity in the dermatology workforce.

Background: Patient outcomes are improved when dermatologists provide inpatient consultations. Inpatient access to dermatologists is limited, illustrating an opportunity to use teledermatology. Little is known about the ability of dermatologists to accurately diagnose disease and manage inpatients with teledermatology, particularly when using nondermatologist-generated clinical data., Methods: This prospective study assessed the ability of teledermatology to diagnose disease and manage 41 dermatology consultations from a large urban tertiary care center, using internal medicine referral documentation and photographs. Twenty-seven dermatology hospitalists were surveyed. Interrater agreement was assessed by the κ statistic., Results: There was substantial agreement between in-person and teledermatology assessment of the diagnosis with differential diagnosis (median κ = 0.83), substantial agreement in laboratory evaluation decisions (median κ = 0.67), almost perfect agreement in imaging decisions (median κ = 1.0), and moderate agreement in biopsy decisions (median κ = 0.43). There was almost perfect agreement in treatment (median κ = 1.0), but no agreement in follow-up planning (median κ = 0.0). There was no association between raw photograph quality and the primary plus differential diagnosis or primary diagnosis alone., Limitations: Selection bias and single-center nature., Conclusions: Teledermatology may be effective in the inpatient setting, with concordant diagnosis, evaluation, and management decisions., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Cellular neurothekeoma is a rare cutaneous tumor that occurs more frequently in women. A 68-year-old female with a history of left nasal alar basal cell carcinoma and Guillain-Barré syndrome presented to the clinic with a 3-mm firm skin-colored papule with scattered telangiectasias. Histopathologic examination with immunochemistry of the lesion was consistent with cellular neurothekeoma. It stained positive for microphthalmia transcription factor and NKI-C3 and negative for HMB-45 and S-100. The lesion was excised with 3-mm margins, and no recurrence was noted within 1 year of follow-up. We present a case of cellular neurothekeoma in a patient with a history of Guillain-Barré syndrome as well as a review of the literature. Our case report is unique in that no prior association has been found in the literature between cellular neurothekeoma and Guillain-Barré syndrome. © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated discussions about reforms needed in the dermatology residency application process. We sought to evaluate the perspectives of dermatology program directors (PDs) and applicants regarding changes implemented during the 2020-2021 application cycle and measure support for potential reforms. Two online surveys were distributed to PDs and applicants who participated in the 2020-2021 dermatology residency match. Responses were collected from a total of 79 PDs (73.8% response rate, 83.5% complete responses) and 232 applicants (83.6% complete responses). The top 3 reforms supported by PDs were application caps (89.4% in favor), interview caps (86.4% in favor), and token preference signaling (81.8% in favor). The top 3 reforms supported by applicants were coordinated interview invite release (89.7% in favor), national webinars with PDs and/or faculty to discuss the application process (86.6% in favor), and formalized mentorship programs with PDs and/or faculty (78.4% in favor). This study was limited by the inability to capture responses from more dermatology applicants, possibly affecting the generalizability of the results. We identified broad support for multiple proposed reforms to the dermatology residency application process, particularly to improve the efficiency of application review and strengthen communication between programs and applicants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]