Shahin, Ahmad B

AbstractThis case describes a pediatric patient with a history of ichthyosis vulgaris and global anhidrosis who was diagnosed with erythema ab igne (EAI), a rare dermatosis resulting from chronic heat exposure. After developing progressive, reticulated brown patches on his extremities and abdomen, extensive diagnostic investigations were conducted to rule out autoimmune, vascular, and genetic etiologies. Bloodwork was unrevealing and biopsies showed histologic features closely resembling keratosis lichenoides chronica. Ultimately, after discovering the patient had prolonged exposure to a space heater, the diagnosis of EAI was made. This case underscores the diagnostic challenges in pediatric EAI cases and emphasizes the importance of careful history taking as part of a comprehensive evaluation.

A male patient was evaluated by the dermatology inpatient consult service after a 5-week history of a skin lesion on the right anterior thigh with intermittent itching and mild tenderness to palpation. What is your diagnosis?

AbstractBackgroundImmunotherapies have changed the landscape of late‐stage melanoma; however, data evaluating timely access to immunotherapy are lacking.MethodsA retrospective cohort study utilizing the National Cancer Database was conducted. Stage III and IV melanoma cases diagnosed between 2011 and 2018 that received systemic treatment with either immunotherapy or chemotherapy were included. Chemotherapy included BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to evaluate factors associated with the likelihood of receiving immunotherapy as primary systemic treatment relative to chemotherapy; additionally, Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to incorporate time from diagnosis to primary systemic therapy into the analysis.ResultsThe study population was comprised of 14,446 cases. The cohort included 12,053 (83.4%) immunotherapy and 2393 (16.6%) chemotherapy cases. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, factors significantly associated with immunotherapy receipt included population density, circle distance, year of diagnosis, Breslow thickness, and cancer stage. Immunotherapy timing was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Minorities were less likely to receive timely immunotherapy than non‐Hispanic Whites (HR 0.83, CI 0.74–0.93, p = 0.001). Patients at circle distances of 10–49 miles (HR 0.94, CI 0.89–0.99, p = 0.02) and ≥50 miles (HR 0.83, CI 0.77–0.90, p < 0.001) were less likely to receive timely immunotherapy.ConclusionPatients traveling ≥10 miles and minorities have a decreased likelihood of receiving timely immunotherapy administration for primary systemic treatment. Future research is needed to identify what barriers and approaches can be leveraged to address these inequities.

Introduction/Objectives: Telehealth services expanded during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Student-run free clinics (SRFC) deliver important health care services to underserved populations, who may face barriers to telehealth use. This study characterizes telehealth usage, experiences, and attitudes among individuals working in SRFCs. Methods: In November 2021, a survey adapted from the COVID-19 Healthcare Coalition Telehealth Impact Physician Survey was sent to all registrants who identified themselves as students at the 2020 Society of Student-Run Free Clinics Annual Conference. Results: Thirty-eight individuals of 576 registrants (7%) representing 21 of 88 (24%) SRFCs completed the survey. Twenty-one (58%) individuals reported using telehealth in their clinic. Those that did not cited lack of infrastructure as a barrier (eg, broadband, Internet challenges, technology investments), were more likely to serve homeless (P = .01), and less likely to serve non-English speaking populations (P = .02). There were increases in telehealth and decreases in in-person visits after March 11, 2020 though changes did not reach statistical significance. At least 15 (68%) wanted to continue chronic disease management, preventative care, and mental/behavioral health via telehealth after COVID-19. Most felt that telehealth was easy to use and improved the health, safety, and timeliness of care of patients, but not work satisfaction or access to care. Difficulty accessing physical devices, Internet, and data was the most-cited barrier to maintaining and accessing telehealth. Conclusions: Nearly all participants cited significant benefits and barriers to telehealth that impacted perceived access to care and sustainability. SRFCs’ experiences may be modulated by their underserved populations and role in student education. Addressing barriers, particularly patient- and clinic-level technology challenges, could work to improve inequities in telehealth uptake.