dermatologist

皮肤科医生
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:性传播感染(STIs)和生殖道感染(RTIs)在全球范围内构成了重大的公共卫生挑战。特别是在资源有限的环境中。这项研究旨在调查医疗保健提供者在管理和预防印度性传播感染/RTI方面面临的挑战。材料和方法对8家医疗保健提供者进行了深入访谈,包括辅导员,妇科医生,和皮肤科医生,在政府环境中工作。半结构化访谈指南用于探索与患者护理和医疗保健系统资源相关的挑战。结果研究显示,患者对性传播感染/RTI的知识和意识存在显著差距,误解会影响寻求治疗的行为。社会耻辱和文化障碍被认为是开放沟通和及时护理的主要障碍。注意到在寻求医疗保健行为和伴侣通知方面存在针对性别的挑战。医疗保健提供者报告说,治疗试剂盒和药物的可用性不一致,以及在确保患者依从性方面的挑战。需要改善医疗基础设施,包括专门诊所和更好的部门间协调,被突出显示。结论应对STI/RTI管理挑战需要多方面的方法,包括提高公众意识,确保一致的药物供应,建立专门诊所,加强部门间的协调。这些发现为在资源有限的环境中开发有针对性的干预措施以改善STI/RTI管理和预防提供了宝贵的见解。
    Background Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and reproductive tract infections (RTIs) pose significant public health challenges globally, particularly in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to investigate the challenges faced by healthcare providers in managing and preventing STIs/RTIs in India. Materials and methods In-depth interviews were conducted with eight healthcare providers, including counselors, gynecologists, and dermatologists, working in government settings. A semi-structured interview guide was used to explore challenges related to patient care and healthcare system resources. Results The study revealed significant gaps in patient knowledge and awareness about STIs/RTIs, with misconceptions affecting treatment-seeking behavior. Social stigma and cultural barriers were identified as major obstacles to open communication and timely care. Gender-specific challenges in healthcare-seeking behavior and partner notification were noted. Healthcare providers reported inconsistent availability of treatment kits and medications, as well as challenges in ensuring patient compliance. The need for improved healthcare infrastructure, including specialized clinics and better interdepartmental coordination, was highlighted. Conclusion Addressing STI/RTI management challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including enhancing public awareness, ensuring consistent medication supply, establishing specialized clinics, and improving interdepartmental coordination. These findings provide valuable insights for developing targeted interventions to improve STI/RTI management and prevention in resource-limited settings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:对德国特应性皮炎(AD)皮肤病治疗患者的医疗保健进行的流行病学研究表明,在10年内没有改善。除了皮肤科医生,全科医生(GP)尤其参与AD治疗.本研究分析了全科医生对成人AD患者的保健情况。
    方法:从2019年至2021年,在整个德国的一般实践中进行了横断面问卷调查“PsoADA”,并将结果与皮肤病学护理的先前数据进行了比较(AtopicHealth2,2017-19)。
    结果:在150名患者中(平均年龄:40岁,62.2%女性),39.2%的人接受了皮肤科医生的额外治疗(GP+D)。20.7%的GP+D和5.7%的仅在GP治疗的患者(仅GP)患有重度AD(p<0.01,AtopicHealth2:27.6%)。生活质量的主要限制分别为31.0%(GPD)和3.4%(仅GP)(p<0.001,AtopicHealth2:31.6%)。大多数患者接受了局部治疗,主要是糖皮质激素。钙调神经磷酸酶抑制剂目前施用2.7%(PsoADA总量)。患者教育报告为5.7%(PsoADA总计)。
    结论:在GP治疗中相当比例的AD患者表现出不良的预后,正如在皮肤病学护理中观察到的-可能是由于缺乏使用现代全身疗法。
    OBJECTIVE: Epidemiological studies on the health care of patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in dermatological treatment in Germany indicate no improvements within 10 years. In addition to dermatologists, general practitioners (GPs) are particularly involved in AD treatment. This study analyzed the health care situation of adult patients with AD by GPs.
    METHODS: The cross-sectional questionnaire survey \"PsoADA\" was conducted from 2019 to 2021 in general practices throughout Germany and the results were compared with previous data from dermatology care (AtopicHealth2, 2017-19).
    RESULTS: Among 150 patients (mean age: 40 years, 62.2% female), 39.2% received additional treatment by a dermatologist (GP+D). 20.7% of GP+D and 5.7% of patients in GP treatment only (GP only) had severe AD (p < 0.01, AtopicHealth2: 27.6%). Major limitations in quality of life were reported by 31.0% (GP+D) versus 3.4% (GP only) (p < 0.001, AtopicHealth2: 31.6%). Most patients received topicals, mainly glucocorticosteroids. Calcineurin inhibitors were currently administered by 2.7% (PsoADA total). Patient education was reported by 5.7% (PsoADA total).
    CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of patients with AD in GP care shows poor outcomes, as has been observed in dermatological care - possibly due to the lack of use of modern systemic therapy.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:关于亚洲成年人特应性皮炎(AD)的现实管理的证据有限。这项横断面研究旨在评估亚洲目前的AD诊断和管理方法。
    方法:从八个亚太地区招募定期治疗中度至重度AD患者的皮肤科医生,即中国大陆,香港,印度,Japan,新加坡,韩国,台湾,和泰国。在筛查并获得知情同意后,对符合条件的皮肤科医生进行了调查。使用描述性统计数据对完全完成的提交的数据进行了分析。该研究由每个地区的机构审查委员会审查。
    结果:纳入来自271名皮肤科医生的数据进行分析。大约三分之一(31.7%)报告说他们在诊断期间参考了Hanifin和Rajka标准。大多数皮肤科医生在评估AD严重程度和治疗反应时使用临床印象。当处理急性(98.1%)和慢性(69.1%)AD时,减少湿疹和瘙痒是主要治疗目标。超过一半的皮肤科医生更愿意为那些对最大限度的局部治疗没有反应的患者添加全身性抗炎药。而对于那些对最大化的全身治疗没有反应的人,43.6%会改用另一种全身药物。皮肤科医生经常选择局部皮质类固醇。对于全身治疗,口服皮质类固醇是最常用的,其次是环孢菌素和dupilumab。窄带紫外线B是最常见的光疗(84.9%)。用于治疗AD的疗法的估计平均和最大持续时间存在相当大的差异。
    结论:本研究为亚太地区中重度AD的实际管理提供了见解。诊断和治疗的不同方法突出了AD的多因素性质,依赖临床判断,个性化护理的重要性。为了改善AD患者的预后,开发用于诊断的生物标志物将是至关重要的,减少评估的主观性,以及促进获得更新和有效的疗法。
    BACKGROUND: Limited evidence is available on real-world management of atopic dermatitis (AD) among Asian adults. This cross-sectional study aimed to assess current approaches in AD diagnosis and management in Asia.
    METHODS: Practising dermatologists regularly treating patients with moderate-to-severe AD were recruited from eight Asia-Pacific territories, namely Mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. A survey was administered to eligible dermatologists after screening and taking informed consent. Data from fully completed submissions were analysed using descriptive statistics. The study was reviewed by the institutional review board in each territory.
    RESULTS: Data from 271 dermatologists were included for analysis. About one-third (31.7%) reported that they referred to the Hanifin and Rajka criteria during diagnosis. The majority of dermatologists used clinical impression when assessing AD severity and treatment response. Reduction of eczema and pruritus was the primary treatment objective when managing both acute (98.1%) and chronic (69.1%) AD. More than half of dermatologists preferred adding systemic anti-inflammatory medication for patients who did not respond to maximized topical treatment, while 43.6% would switch to another systemic medication for those failing to respond to maximized systemic treatment. Topical corticosteroids were frequently selected by dermatologists. For systemic therapies, oral corticosteroids were most frequently used, followed by cyclosporin and dupilumab. Narrow-band ultraviolet B was the most common phototherapy reported (84.9%). There was considerable variation in estimated average and maximum durations of therapies used to treat AD.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided insights on the real-world management of moderate-to-severe AD in the Asia-Pacific region. The diverse approaches in diagnosis and treatment highlight the multifactorial nature of AD, reliance on clinical judgement, and importance of personalized care. To improve outcomes in patients with AD, it will be crucial to develop biomarkers for diagnosis, reduce subjectivity in assessment, as well as promote access to newer and effective therapies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    患者获得皮肤病护理的经验尚未得到充分研究。这项横断面研究的目的是检查纽约市新患者接受皮肤病学护理的当前等待时间。对纽约市五个行政区的58家认可的私立和公立医院的网站进行了审查,以确定皮肤病学的做法。每个网站上列出的办公室电话号码被调用,以收集有关医生是否接受新患者的信息,接受的保险类型(公共,私人,两者,或无),以及可以预约新患者的天数。还收集了与保留时间和基于网络的预订的可用性有关的数据。预约的平均等待时间为50天[标准差,SD66]-近2个月,但是分布有很大的偏差。中位等待时间为19.5天[四分位距,IQR4-60].等待预约的时间大约在1分钟(63秒,SD=77),但可能需要约7分钟。三分之二的皮肤科医生接受私人,Medicare,和医疗补助保险(n=228,66%);少数人只接受私人保险(n=12,4%)或根本没有保险(n=16,5%)。接受医疗补助的228名提供者的预约等待时间中位数为30.5天(IQR=5.0-73.25),而不接受医疗补助的提供者(n=116)的预约等待时间中位数为13.0天(IQR=3.0-38.0)。超过一半(56%)的皮肤科医生允许在其网站上预订约会(n=193)。这项研究强调了将新策略纳入常规皮肤科预约的必要性,以增加治疗可用性并减少医疗保健不平等。
    Patients\' experience accessing dermatologic care is understudied. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to examine current wait times for new patients to receive dermatological care in NYC. Websites at 58 accredited private and public hospitals in the five boroughs of NYC were reviewed to identify dermatology practices. Office telephone numbers listed on each website were called to collect information pertaining to whether the physician was accepting new patients, type of insurance accepted (public, private, both, or none), and the number of days until a new patient could be seen for an appointment. Data pertaining to the time kept on hold and availability of web-based booking were also collected. Mean waiting time for an appointment was 50 days [standard deviation, SD 66] - nearly 2 months, but the distribution was considerably skewed. The median waiting time was 19.5 days [Interquartile range, IQR 4-60]. The time kept on hold to make the appointment was negligible at about 1 min (63 s, SD = 77) but could take up to ~ 7 min. Two-thirds of dermatologists accepted private, Medicare, and Medicaid insurance (n = 228, 66%); a small number accepted only private insurance (n = 12, 4%) or no insurance at all (n = 16, 5%). The median waiting time for an appointment for the 228 providers that accepted Medicaid was 30.5 days (IQR = 5.0-73.25) while for providers who did not accept Medicaid (n = 116) the median wait time for an appointment was 13.0 days (IQR = 3.0-38.0). Just over half (56%) of the dermatologists allowed for appointments to be booked on their website (n = 193). This research highlights the necessity of incorporating new strategies into routine dermatology appointments in order to increase treatment availability and decrease healthcare inequality.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:患者报告的结果与临床实践相关,显示患者的益处,支持临床医生的决策,并有助于提供高标准的护理。对患者报告的结果进行数字监测仍然很少见。患者获益指数(PBI)衡量患者观点的获益和目标,可能与定期记录和共同决策相关。
    目的:本研究旨在开发PBI的电子版,以检查其在银屑病患者临床实践中的可行性和可接受性。
    方法:我们开发了一个应用程序,在对其可行性和可接受性进行定量调查之前,使用焦点小组和对患者的认知汇报进行有效的PBI。Conduction参加了德国的门诊皮肤科护理室。进行描述性和亚组分析。
    结果:共有139名患者完成了电子PBIs(ePBIs)并参与了调查。ePBI是可以理解的(n=129-137,92.8%-98.6%)和可行的,例如,易于阅读(n=135,97.1%)和简单处理(n=137,98.5%)。可接受性也很高,例如,患者可以想象在实践中使用和讨论ePBI数据(n=91,65.5%)并定期记录(n=88,63.3%).他们认为它可以支持治疗决策(n=118,84.9%)并改善与医生的沟通(n=112,81.3%)。他们可以想象定期填写电子问卷(n=118,84.9%),甚至更喜欢电子版本而不是纸质版本(n=113,81.2%)。年龄较大和受教育程度较低的人表现出更小的可行性,但是后者希望与医生的关系得到改善,并且更愿意投入时间或精力。
    结论:PBI的应用程序和网络版本对于提供全面文档和患者参与实践的患者是可用和可接受的。实施策略应考虑患者的需求,障碍,和促进者,还有医生的态度和医疗保健系统的要求。
    BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are relevant in clinical practice showing patient benefits, supporting clinicians\' decision-making, and contributing to the delivery of high standards of care. Digital monitoring of patient-reported outcomes is still rare. The Patient Benefit Index (PBI) measures benefits and goals from patients\' views and may be relevant for regular documentation and shared decision-making.
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop electronic versions of the PBI to examine their feasibility and acceptability in clinical practice for patients with psoriasis.
    METHODS: We developed an app and a web version of the existing, valid PBI using focus groups and cognitive debriefings with patients before conducting a quantitative survey on its feasibility and acceptability. Conduction took part in an outpatient dermatology care unit in Germany. Descriptive and subgroup analyses were conducted.
    RESULTS: A total of 139 patients completed the electronic PBIs (ePBIs) and took part in the survey. The ePBI was understandable (n=129-137, 92.8%-98.6%) and feasible, for example, easy to read (n=135, 97.1%) and simple to handle (n=137, 98.5%). Acceptability was also high, for example, patients can imagine using and discussing the ePBI data in practice (n=91, 65.5%) and documenting it regularly (n=88, 63.3%). They believe it could support treatment decisions (n=118, 84.9%) and improve communication with their physician (n=112, 81.3%). They can imagine filling in electronic questionnaires regularly (n=118, 84.9%), even preferring electronic over paper versions (n=113, 81.2%). Older and less educated people show less feasibility, but the latter expected the relationship with their physician to improve and would be more willing to invest time or effort.
    CONCLUSIONS: The app and web version of the PBI are usable and acceptable for patients offering comprehensive documentation and patient participation in practice. An implementation strategy should consider patients\' needs, barriers, and facilitators but also physicians\' attitudes and requirements from the health care system.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:人工智能(AI)和大型语言模型(LLM)的最新进展在医学领域显示出潜力,包括皮肤病学。随着LLM中图像分析功能的引入,它们在皮肤病学诊断中的应用引起了极大的兴趣。这些功能是通过将计算机视觉技术集成到LLM的底层体系结构中而实现的。
    目的:本研究旨在比较Claude3Opus和ChatGPT与GPT-4在分析皮肤镜图像以进行黑色素瘤检测方面的诊断性能。提供洞察他们的优势和局限性。
    方法:我们随机选择了100个组织病理学证实的皮肤镜图像(50个恶性,50良性)来自国际皮肤成像合作组织(ISIC)档案,使用计算机生成的随机化过程。之所以选择ISIC档案,是因为它收集了全面且注释齐全的皮肤图像,确保多样化和代表性的样本。如果是经组织病理学证实的黑素细胞病变的皮肤镜图像,则包括图像。每个模型都给出了相同的提示,指示它为每张图像提供前3个鉴别诊断,按可能性排序。初级诊断准确性,前3种鉴别诊断的准确性,并评估恶性肿瘤的辨别能力。选择McNemar测试来比较2种型号的诊断性能,因为它适合分析配对的标称数据。
    结果:在主要诊断中,克劳德3Opus实现了54.9%的灵敏度(95%CI44.08%-65.37%),57.14%特异性(95%CI46.31%-67.46%),和56%的准确率(95%CI46.22%-65.42%),而ChatGPT表现出56.86%的敏感性(95%CI45.99%-67.21%),特异性38.78%(95%CI28.77%-49.59%),准确率为48%(95%CI38.37%-57.75%)。McNemar检验显示两种模型之间没有显着差异(P=0.17)。对于前3个鉴别诊断,Claude3Opus和ChatGPT包括76%(95%CI66.33%-83.77%)和78%(95%CI68.46%-85.45%)的病例的正确诊断,分别。McNemar检验无显著性差异(P=0.56)。在恶性肿瘤歧视中,Claude3Opus的表现优于ChatGPT,灵敏度为47.06%,81.63%特异性,准确率为64%,与45.1%相比,42.86%,44%,分别。McNemar检验显示差异显著(P<.001)。Claude3Opus在区分恶性肿瘤方面的比值比为3.951(95%CI1.685-9.263),而ChatGPT-4的比值比为0.616(95%CI0.297-1.278)。
    结论:我们的研究强调了LLM在协助皮肤科医生方面的潜力,但也揭示了其局限性。两种模型在诊断黑色素瘤和良性病变时都出错。这些发现强调了开发健壮,透明,以及通过人工智能研究人员之间的协作努力进行临床验证的人工智能模型,皮肤科医生,和其他医疗保健专业人员。虽然AI可以提供有价值的见解,它还不能取代训练有素的临床医生的专业知识。
    BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) have shown potential in medical fields, including dermatology. With the introduction of image analysis capabilities in LLMs, their application in dermatological diagnostics has garnered significant interest. These capabilities are enabled by the integration of computer vision techniques into the underlying architecture of LLMs.
    OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of Claude 3 Opus and ChatGPT with GPT-4 in analyzing dermoscopic images for melanoma detection, providing insights into their strengths and limitations.
    METHODS: We randomly selected 100 histopathology-confirmed dermoscopic images (50 malignant, 50 benign) from the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) archive using a computer-generated randomization process. The ISIC archive was chosen due to its comprehensive and well-annotated collection of dermoscopic images, ensuring a diverse and representative sample. Images were included if they were dermoscopic images of melanocytic lesions with histopathologically confirmed diagnoses. Each model was given the same prompt, instructing it to provide the top 3 differential diagnoses for each image, ranked by likelihood. Primary diagnosis accuracy, accuracy of the top 3 differential diagnoses, and malignancy discrimination ability were assessed. The McNemar test was chosen to compare the diagnostic performance of the 2 models, as it is suitable for analyzing paired nominal data.
    RESULTS: In the primary diagnosis, Claude 3 Opus achieved 54.9% sensitivity (95% CI 44.08%-65.37%), 57.14% specificity (95% CI 46.31%-67.46%), and 56% accuracy (95% CI 46.22%-65.42%), while ChatGPT demonstrated 56.86% sensitivity (95% CI 45.99%-67.21%), 38.78% specificity (95% CI 28.77%-49.59%), and 48% accuracy (95% CI 38.37%-57.75%). The McNemar test showed no significant difference between the 2 models (P=.17). For the top 3 differential diagnoses, Claude 3 Opus and ChatGPT included the correct diagnosis in 76% (95% CI 66.33%-83.77%) and 78% (95% CI 68.46%-85.45%) of cases, respectively. The McNemar test showed no significant difference (P=.56). In malignancy discrimination, Claude 3 Opus outperformed ChatGPT with 47.06% sensitivity, 81.63% specificity, and 64% accuracy, compared to 45.1%, 42.86%, and 44%, respectively. The McNemar test showed a significant difference (P<.001). Claude 3 Opus had an odds ratio of 3.951 (95% CI 1.685-9.263) in discriminating malignancy, while ChatGPT-4 had an odds ratio of 0.616 (95% CI 0.297-1.278).
    CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the potential of LLMs in assisting dermatologists but also reveals their limitations. Both models made errors in diagnosing melanoma and benign lesions. These findings underscore the need for developing robust, transparent, and clinically validated AI models through collaborative efforts between AI researchers, dermatologists, and other health care professionals. While AI can provide valuable insights, it cannot yet replace the expertise of trained clinicians.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:尽管在COVID-19大流行期间,远程皮肤科在全球范围内普及,持久的障碍,比如糟糕的回忆和照片质量,阻碍其在实践中的有效使用。需要了解荷兰皮肤科医生的经验和在荷兰医疗保健系统中使用远程皮肤病学系统的满意度。整体评估可以提供有价值的见解,以了解障碍如何相互关联,这对于实践中的皮肤学创新是必要的。
    目标:在复杂适应系统观点的指导下,这项研究旨在了解荷兰皮肤科医生的经验和对培训的满意度,支持沟通,互动,以及在COVID-19大流行期间使用荷兰数字医院的远程皮肤病学平台,发现见解,以改善未来的远程皮肤病学服务。
    方法:2021年12月向荷兰皮肤科医生发送了一份基于网络的问卷,他们(1)拥有活跃的远程皮肤病学平台帐户,(2)在2019年10月1日至2021年9月30日期间回复了皮肤远程咨询。该问卷包括经过验证的存储和转发远程医疗服务用户满意度问卷(SAF-TSUQ)问卷,和新的问题;远程皮肤科医生的人口统计学,在COVID-19大流行期间使用皮肤学,全科医生(GP)的远程皮肤病学表现,以及皮肤科医生在远程皮肤病学过程中的作用。开放式问题是通过以社会技术模型为指导的扎根理论方法进行分析的,并辅之以复杂的自适应系统观点。与3位皮肤科医生进行了小组讨论,以提供对问卷答复的更多见解。
    结果:我们从249位受邀皮肤科医生中的25位(10%)获得了响应。总的来说,皮肤科医生在远程皮肤科有积极的经验。有趣的是,远程皮肤科的使用频率仍不受COVID-19大流行的影响。然而,远程皮肤科会诊的临床内容(照片和查询信息)质量不足和不完整影响了远程皮肤科工作流程的效率。皮肤科医生表示需要改进,以避免耗时的过程或物理转诊。小组讨论丰富并确认了答复,建议解决方案,如全科医生的强制性字段,以进行完整的回忆。
    结论:荷兰皮肤科医生认为远程皮肤科是提供皮肤科护理的宝贵工具。然而,有关提供的临床内容的质量和完整性的改进对于荷兰医疗保健中复杂的远程皮肤病学系统的有效性和效率是必要的。这可以提高皮肤科医生的满意度和远程皮肤科服务的质量。管理权衡,例如时间投资与图像质量,对于远程皮肤病学的实施至关重要,应从复杂性角度进行评估,以了解权衡并防止意外后果。
    BACKGROUND: Despite the global upscale of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, persistent barriers, such as the poor anamnesis and photo quality, hinder its effective use in practice. Understanding Dutch dermatologists\' experiences and satisfaction with using the teledermatology system in the Dutch health care system is needed. A holistic evaluation may provide valuable insight to understand how barriers interrelate which is deemed necessary for the innovation of teledermatology in practice.
    OBJECTIVE: Guided by a complex adaptive system perspective, this study aims to understand Dutch dermatologists\' experience and satisfaction with their training, support communication, interaction, and usage of a teledermatology platform of a Dutch digital hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic, uncovering insights to improve teledermatology services for the future.
    METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was sent in December 2021 to Dutch dermatologists who (1) had an active teledermatology platform account, and (2) responded to a teledermatology consultation between October 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. The questionnaire consisted of the validated Store-and-Forward Telemedicine Service User-satisfaction Questionnaire (SAF-TSUQ) questionnaire, and new questions regarding; demographics of teledermatologists, the use of teledermatology during the COVID-19 pandemic, the performance of teledermatology by general practitioners (GP), and the role of dermatologists in the teledermatology process. The open-ended questions were analyzed by a grounded theory approach guided by a sociotechnical model and complemented by a complex adaptive system perspective. A panel discussion with 3 dermatologists was performed to provide additional insight into the responses to the questionnaire.
    RESULTS: We obtained responses from 25 out of the 249 (10%) invited dermatologists. Overall, dermatologists had a positive experience with teledermatology. Interestingly, teledermatology use frequency remained unaffected by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the insufficient quality and incompleteness of the clinical content (photos and anamneses information) of the teledermatology consultation impacted the efficiency of the teledermatology workflow. Dermatologists expressed the need for improvement to avoid time-consuming processes or physical referrals. The panel discussion enriched and confirmed the responses, suggesting solutions like mandatory fields for the GPs for a complete anamnesis.
    CONCLUSIONS: Dutch Dermatologists view teledermatology as a valuable tool to provide access to dermatology care. However, improvements regarding the quality and completeness of the provided clinical content are necessary for the effectiveness and efficiency of the complex teledermatology system in Dutch health care. This could increase both the dermatologists\' satisfaction and the quality of teledermatology services. Managing trade-offs, such as time investments versus image quality, is crucial for teledermatology implementation and should be assessed from a complexity perspective to understand trade-offs and prevent unintended consequences.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    斑秃(AA)是一种自身免疫性疾病,表现为无疤痕性脱发,并造成大量疾病负担。目前的研究,使用电子索赔数据库,评估疾病负担,合并症,治疗模式,涉及AA诊断的专业,医疗保健资源利用(HCCU),以及迪拜私人保险AA患者的相关费用,阿拉伯联合酋长国。回顾性纵向二次研究使用2014年1月1日至2022年6月30日期间的迪拜真实世界数据库电子索赔数据进行。分析包括在指数期间(2015年1月1日至2021年6月30日)至少有一项AA诊断声明的患者以及连续入组(在指数后期间有一项或多项AA/非AA声明)。根据诊断代码和治疗模式将患者分为子队列,温和,中度至重度,和其他人。人口统计,合并症,治疗模式,专家访问,和HCRU进行了评估。该研究包括11851例AA患者(平均年龄:轻度:37岁;中度至重度:36岁),以男性为主(轻度:77.6%;中度至重度:60.8%)。中度至重度AA亚组中最普遍的合并症是自身免疫和T辅助细胞2介导的免疫疾病,包括接触性皮炎和湿疹(62.1%),特应性皮炎(36.1%),哮喘(36.1%)。大多数患者咨询皮肤科医生的治疗建议(轻度AA:87.4%;中度至重度AA:47.7%)和,特别是,在AA诊断的1天内。在队列中经常开局部类固醇处方,不管疾病的严重程度。对AA患者合并症的分析表明,在这些患者亚组中,HCRU负担增加。与自身免疫和T辅助细胞2介导的免疫疾病相比,心理合并症的疾病特异性HCRU成本中位数更高(224.99美元vs103.70美元)。有严重的疾病和经济负担的患者AA和相关的共病条件;因此,投资针对基础自身免疫途径的新疗法可能会弥补AA有效管理方面的差距.
    Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disorder that manifests as nonscarring hair loss and imposes a substantial disease burden. The current study, using an e-claims database, assesses the disease burden, comorbidities, treatment patterns, specialties involved in the diagnosis of AA, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and associated costs in privately insured patients with AA in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The retrospective longitudinal secondary study was conducted using Dubai Real-World Database e-claims data during 01 January 2014 to 30 June 2022. Patients with at least one diagnosis claim of AA during the index period (01 January 2015-30 June 2021) with continuous enrollment (one or more AA/non-AA claim in the post-index period) were included in the analysis. The patients were stratified into subcohorts based on diagnosis code and treatment patterns, as mild, moderate-to-severe, and others. Demographics, comorbidities, treatment patterns, specialists visited, and HCRU were assessed. The study included 11 851 patients with AA (mean age: mild: 37 years; moderate-to-severe: 36 years), with a male predominance (mild: 77.6%; moderate-to-severe: 60.8%). The most prevalent comorbidities in the moderate-to-severe AA subcohort were autoimmune and T-helper 2-mediated immune disorders, including contact dermatitis and eczema (62.1%), atopic dermatitis (36.1%), and asthma (36.1%). Most patients consulted dermatologists for treatment advice (mild AA: 87.4%; moderate-to-severe AA: 47.7%) and, notably, within 1 day of AA diagnosis. Topical steroids were frequently prescribed across cohorts, regardless of disease severity. Analysis of comorbidities among patients with AA indicated an additional HCRU burden among these subsets of patients. The median disease-specific HCRU cost was higher for psychological comorbidities versus autoimmune and T-helper 2-mediated immune disorders (US $224.99 vs US $103.70). There is a substantial disease and economic burden in patients with AA and associated comorbid conditions; therefore, investing in novel therapies that target the underlying autoimmune pathway may address the gap in effective management of AA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:目前尚不清楚特应性皮炎(AD)患者和临床医生如何看待患者与临床医生的沟通水平,以及是否存在潜在的失误。这项横断面研究旨在比较亚洲AD患者和皮肤科医生对沟通和治疗期望的看法。
    方法:从八个亚太地区招募中度至重度AD患者和执业皮肤科医生,包括中国大陆,香港,印度,Japan,新加坡,韩国,台湾,和泰国。患者和皮肤科医生完成了单独的调查,旨在激发他们对AD管理的期望。以及他们感知的患者-临床医生沟通水平。患者还被问及他们的治疗满意度,以及他们是否更喜欢超出处方的额外治疗。使用描述性统计对人口统计信息和反应进行分析。该研究由每个地区的机构审查委员会审查,所有参与者均提供知情同意书。
    结果:共有1103名患者和271名皮肤科医生完成了调查。患者和皮肤科医生在AD管理中的最高治疗目标在很大程度上是一致的。然而,更多的患者优先预防恶化(78.0%对47.2%),将治疗不良反应降至最低(46.4%对9.1%),心理健康改善(16.0%对4.9%),与皮肤科医生相比。尽管观察到患者与临床医生的沟通总体良好,10.9%的患者报告对AD管理中的沟通不满意。大多数患者对他们最新的急性AD治疗“非常满意”或“满意”。但65.5%的患者仍需要额外的治疗。
    结论:这项跨国研究为亚洲患者和皮肤科医生在治疗目标方面的观点提供了见解,AD管理,和沟通。总的来说,患者和皮肤科医师的治疗目标一致,患者-临床医师沟通在大多数方面都令人满意.然而,已经确定了潜在的改进领域,以进一步加强以患者为中心的护理.
    BACKGROUND: It remains unclear how patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and clinicians perceive the level of patient-clinician communication and if there could be potential lapses. This cross-sectional study aims to compare perspectives between patients with AD and dermatologists regarding communication and treatment expectations in Asia.
    METHODS: Moderate-to-severe patients with AD and practicing dermatologists were recruited from eight Asia-Pacific territories, including Mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. Patients and dermatologists completed separate surveys designed to elicit their expectations regarding AD management, and their perceived level of patient-clinician communication. Patients were also asked about their treatment satisfaction and whether they prefer additional treatment beyond what was prescribed. Demographic information and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study was reviewed by the institutional review board in each territory, and all participants provided informed consent.
    RESULTS: A total of 1103 patients and 271 dermatologists completed the surveys. Both patients and dermatologists were largely aligned in their top treatment goals in AD management. However, greater proportions of patients prioritized the prevention of exacerbation (78.0% versus 47.2%), minimization of treatment adverse effects (46.4% versus 9.1%), and improvement in mental health (16.0% versus 4.9%), compared with dermatologists. Although patient-clinician communication was observed to be generally good, 10.9% of patients reported dissatisfaction with communication in AD management. The majority of patients were either \"very satisfied\" or \"satisfied\" with their latest acute AD treatment, but 65.5% of patients still desired additional treatment.
    CONCLUSIONS: This multinational study has provided insights on the perspectives of Asian patients and dermatologists in treatment goals, AD management, and communication. In general, both patients and dermatologists were aligned in treatment goals and there was satisfactory patient-clinician communication in most aspects. However, potential areas of improvement have been identified to further enhance patient-centered care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:公平的卫生人力分配对于菲律宾卫生部成功实施全民医疗保健(UHC)计划至关重要。绘制菲律宾皮肤科医生的分布和概况可以改善菲律宾人获得皮肤病治疗的机会。
    方法:对菲律宾皮肤病学会(PDS)成员目录中皮肤科医生数据库的回顾(截至2023年11月),以及菲律宾健康保险公司(PhilHealth)数据库(截至2023年7月),进行了。按地理位置分析了PDS认可的皮肤科医生的分布,人口统计(年龄和性别),密度(每10万人),和皮肤科医生与全科医生(GP)的比率。创建了热图,说明了菲律宾皮肤科医生的分布以及PhilHealth认可的PDS董事会认证的皮肤科医生与全科医生的比例。
    结果:在1389名PDS委员会认证的皮肤科医生中,1345年居住在菲律宾。大多数是女性(1221/1345,90.78%),年龄中位数为47岁(范围:23至85岁)。超过一半的人在国家首都地区(NCR)执业(684/1345,50.86%)。皮肤科医生的总体密度约为每100,000人中有1人(1.19);吕宋岛组最高(1.54)(NCR,4.80),棉兰老岛组最低(0.27;穆斯林棉兰老岛或BARMM的Bangsamoro自治区,0.04).不到三分之一(396/1345,29.44%)的皮肤科医生获得了PhilHealth认证,皮肤科医生的密度为每10万人0.35人。在45218名获得PhilHealth认证的医生中,皮肤科医生396人(0.88%),全科医生11748人(25.98%)。PhilHealth认可的医生中皮肤科医生与GP的总体比例为1:30;在吕宋岛组中最高(1:20),在棉兰老岛组中最低(1:118)。
    结论:菲律宾在NCR以外的地区缺乏皮肤科医生。大多数是女性,很少有人获得PhilHealth认证。PhilHealth认可的医生中皮肤科医生与GP的比率很低。皮肤科培训计划应该鼓励更多的申请者,尤其是男人,并优先考虑来自服务不足地区的申请人。
    BACKGROUND: Equitable health manpower distribution is essential for the successful implementation of the Universal Health Care (UHC) program by the Philippine Department of Health. Mapping the distribution and profile of dermatologists in the Philippines can improve Filipinos\' access to skin disease treatment.
    METHODS: A review of the database of dermatologists from the Philippine Dermatological Society (PDS) members\' directory (as of November 2023), as well as the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) database (as of July 2023), was conducted. The distribution of PDS-accredited dermatologists was analyzed by geographic location, demographic profile (age and sex), density (per 100,000 people), and the dermatologist-to-general practitioner (GP) ratio. Heatmaps illustrating the distribution of dermatologists in the Philippines and the ratio of PhilHealth-accredited PDS board-certified dermatologists to GPs were created.
    RESULTS: Out of 1389 PDS board-certified dermatologists, 1345 resided in the Philippines. The majority were women (1221/1345, 90.78%), with a median age of 47 years (range: 23 to 85). More than half were practicing in the National Capital Region (NCR) (684/1345, 50.86%). The overall dermatologist density was approximately 1 per 100,000 people (1.19); it was highest for the Luzon Island group (1.54) (NCR, 4.80) and lowest for the Mindanao Island group (0.27; the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao or BARMM, 0.04). Less than one-third (396/1345, 29.44%) of dermatologists were PhilHealth-accredited, with a density of 0.35 dermatologists per 100,000 people. Out of 45218 PhilHealth-accredited physicians, 396 (0.88%) were dermatologists while 11748 (25.98%) were GPs. The overall dermatologist-to-GP ratio among PhilHealth-accredited physicians was 1:30; it was highest in the Luzon Island group (1:20) and lowest in the Mindanao Island group (1:118).
    CONCLUSIONS: The Philippines lacks dermatologists in regions outside the NCR. The majority are women, and few are PhilHealth-accredited. The dermatologist-to-GP ratio among PhilHealth-accredited physicians is low. Dermatology training programs should encourage more applicants, especially men, and prioritize applicants from underserved regions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号