Management of external genital warts by dermatologists: a French survey

BACKGROUND: External genital wart is the most frequent sexually transmitted disease. While there are guidelines for management and treatment, no data about primary care of this viral disease is available in France. So, we conducted a survey on French dermatologists'management of external genital warts. METHODS: In July and August 2001, a questionnaire - including questions on physicians and patients, sexually transmitted diseases, partners, clinical and viral evaluations, treatments, and follow-up - was mailed to 652 French dermatologists (randomization of 20 p. 100 of French dermatologists). RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty (53 p. 100) responses were returned. Dermatologists were mainly exclusively office practitioners (58 p. 100). Thirty-six percent of them were taking care of more than 3 patients per month with external genital warts. Patients were essentially men and immunocompetent. Only 52 p. 100 of physicians systematically performed a sexually transmitted disease evaluation, 38 p. 100 a partner evaluation, and 17 p. 100 a local evaluation for external genital warts. Biopsy was occasionally performed by 48 p. 100 of physicians, mainly in order to confirm diagnosis. Viral genotyping was rare. Cryotherapy (84 to 93 p. 100) and podophyllotoxin (40 to 55 p. 100) were the two treatments used as first line therapy, while laser (61 to 71 p. 100), and imiquimod (39 to 48 p. 100) were second line therapies. Sixty-three percent of physicians proposed a systematic clinical control after clinical recovery. CONCLUSION: This large survey represents an overview on general practice concerning external genital warts among French dermatologists. Our study points out the lack of global management (loco-regional, partner, and STD evaluation) of the disease by dermatologists.     

Dermatologists and office-based care of dermatologic disease in the 21st century

Most professional care of skin diseases is provided in physicians' offices. In the past 25 y, medical practice has changed substantially. Since 1973, the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey has provided data about patients seen in physicians' offices. Using 1974, 1980, and 1989 data, we have previously analyzed these data as they pertain to skin diseases. To provide a more current assessment of dermatologists' practices and the care of skin diseases in office-based practice, we analyzed National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data for 1999 to 2000. We used statistical methods for survey data to estimate the number and characteristics of visits to dermatologists and others for skin diseases. We compared the characteristics of dermatologists' office-based practices with those of other physicians. In 1999 to 2000, there were approximately 35 million visits annually to office-based dermatologists, double the number for 1974. Eight diagnostic groups account for 65% of all visits to dermatologists. Acne is still the most frequent primary diagnosis at visits to dermatologists, but since 1974 the proportion of all visits that were for acne has decreased by half. Compared to other office-based physicians, dermatologists are significantly more likely to own their practices (OR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.52-5.02) and much less likely to see capitated patients (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.53). Over 26 y, utilization of dermatologists' services has grown in proportion to the increase in the number of office-based dermatologists. The organization of their practices has changed little. Dermatologists dominate the care of many of the same diagnoses as they did 20 y ago.     

The gatekeeper model is inefficient for the delivery of dermatologic services

BACKGROUND: Gatekeeper-paradigm managed care systems may discourage the use of dermatologists in the management of skin conditions by limiting direct access. This may limit the quality of care patients with skin disorders receive and may be an inefficient use of medical resources. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the likelihood that patients with dermatologic conditions who see a primary care provider will be referred to a dermatologist. METHODS: Data on the disposition of outpatient visits to primary care physicians for one and only one dermatologic diagnosis were obtained from the 1990-1994 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. These data were used in an econometric model to estimate the likelihood of referral to a dermatologist for an episode of care. RESULTS: Of all visits for a single dermatologic diagnosis, 39% were to primary care physicians. The disposition of referral was more common for these dermatology-related visits than for all office visits to primary care physicians (5.8% vs 4.5%, P < .001). The most frequent diagnoses associated with referral were common dermatologic problems, not rare disorders. The number of visits per episode of care was highly dependent on the assumptions of the analysis, resulting in estimate ranges for referral rates per episode between 6.8% and 18.5% for pediatricians, 8.2% and 23% for family and general practitioners, and 16.6% and 46.5% for internists. CONCLUSION: The relative difficulty for primary care providers of managing skin problems is reflected by their frequent need to refer patients with common skin problems and by the greater likelihood of referral for skin disorders than for other medical conditions. The high rates of referral per episode of care supports the cost-effectiveness of direct access to dermatologists.     

Condylomata acuminata (genital warts): patient demographics and treating physicians.

BACKGROUND: Condylomata acuminata (genital warts), caused by the human papillomavirus, are common and sexually transmitted. However, the use of healthcare services for condylomata has never been characterized from a national probability sample study. GOAL: To understand better the demographics of patients seen by physicians for this disorder. STUDY DESIGN: Data from office visits for warts, both condylomata and noncondylomatous types, were obtained from the 1994 to 1998 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. RESULTS: The age distribution of those treated for condylomata peaked in 20- to 39-year-olds, with more than 70% of patients in this age category. A younger and wider age distribution was seen in patients with noncondylomatous warts. Women accounted for 67% of the population seen for condylomata, whereas a more equal number of women and men were seen for noncondylomatous warts. Per capita healthcare use for condylomata was equal between blacks and whites, and whites had almost five times more per capita healthcare use than blacks for noncondylomatous warts. Obstetrician/gynecologists were the most commonly consulted physicians for condylomata. Per capita condylomata visits per physician were highest for obstetrician/gynecologists, dermatologists, and urologists, and lower for all other physicians. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in age distribution between condylomata and noncondylomatous visits likely results from differing modes of transmission and age at first sexual contact. Females are more likely than males to use health care for condylomata, which may be attributable to increased prevalence, differences in treatment efficacy, differences in the gender frequency of genital health screenings, or psychosocial causes. Healthcare use for condylomata appears equal between blacks and whites. Patients with condylomata acuminata were most often seen by obstetrician/gynecologists, whereas patients with noncondylomatous warts most often consulted dermatologists. The fact that per capita condylomata visits per physician were highest for obstetrician/gynecologists, dermatologists, and urologists may imply that specialists in these fields have expertise in treating these patients.     

Incidence and management of condylomata acuminata by French general physicians

OBJECTIVES: Condylomata acuminata (or genital warts) are sexually transmitted diseases caused by human papillomavirus. Until now, there has been no available epidemiologic data about this disease in France. We conducted a prospective study among French general practitioners (GPs) to estimate the incidence of consultations for external condylomata acuminata in general practice. We also assessed the management of patients with external condylomata acuminata by French GP's. DESIGN: A panel of French general practitioners, members of the Sentinel network, had to fill-in prospectively a questionnaire for each patient with condylomata acuminata diagnosed between July and November 2000. RESULTS: The annual number of consultations for external condylomata acuminata with French GP's was estimated at 23,000 (CI (95 p. 100) 21,000-25,000) including 15,000 new cases (CI (95 p. 100) 13,000-17,000). Taking into account the estimations we made at the same time in office-based private dermatologists, we estimated the annual incidence of external condylomata acuminata in France at 107/100 000 inhabitants. The management of patients with external condylomata acuminata by French GP's was in accordance with the European guidelines in 54 to 78 p. 100 of cases. French GP's mostly prescribed chemical treatment. DISCUSSION: A proportion of cases of condylomata acuminata may have not been diagnosed. Similarly, some lesions may have been wrongly diagnosed as condylomata acuminata, but these proportions of false positive and false negative remain unknown. The incidence of external condylomata acuminata in France is similar to those estimated in others developed countries.     

Utilization of physician services for dermatologic complaints. The United States, 1974.

The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey provides data on the "who," "for what complaint," and "to whom" for office visits to office-based physicians. In 1974, complaints referable to the skin accounted for 44 million physicians visits. This represents 7% of the 634 million visits to physician offices made during this period. Dermatologists accounted for 34% of all visits for skin complaints. General and family practitioners accounted for 40% of such encounters. Office visits prompted by dermatologic complaints were frequently less than 16 minutes long. Each office-based dermatologist accounted for an average of 5,600 patient visit per year. According to the dermatologist's diagnosis, 31% of these visits were prompted by acne; warts accounted for an additional 8%.     

The impact of skin diseases on patients: comparing dermatologists' opinions with research data collected on their patients

BACKGROUND: Research data suggest that the detection of psychiatric disorders by dermatologists is not completely satisfactory, and that patients and dermatologists often assess patients' quality of life differently. Given that expectations influence perception and cognitia, these discrepancies might at least in part descend from conceptual models of skin disease that are prevalent among dermatologists. OBJECTIVES: We explored to what degree dermatologists' opinions about quality of life and prevalence of psychiatric disorders in several dermatological conditions corresponded to the actual data collected on their patients. METHODS: All dermatologists working in a large institution were asked to express on a five-point scale their opinion about the quality of life and the prevalence of depressive and anxiety disorders in different skin conditions. Physicians' opinions were then compared with the results of a large research project on quality of life and psychological well-being in dermatological out-patients performed in their institution some months before. RESULTS: Forty-six dermatologists (82%) agreed to participate and completed the research questionnaire. We observed a fairly good concordance between dermatologists' opinion about the impact of the various skin conditions on patients' lives and survey data on quality of life impairment. With regard to psychiatric morbidity, we found that dermatologists believe that psychiatric disorders are substantially less frequent than they actually are in many skin conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The belief that psychiatric morbidity is rare in patients with certain skin conditions might hamper, at least in part, the recognition of psychiatric disorders in these patients. Dermatologists probably should be more alert to the question of psychiatric morbidity in their patients. Allocating more space to this issue in training programmes for dermatologists might favour a shift in their conceptual models of skin disease.     

Dermatologists facing the risk of viral transmission. Analysis of the precautionary measures of 472 practitioners

On the occasion of the "Journées Dermatologiques de Paris", in March 1988 we designed a survey to evaluate the sterile practices of French dermatologists in the "AIDS era". During the two days meeting, attended by 2,584 participants, 472 questionnaire forms were filled in (answer rate 18.5 p. 100). Among responders 43 p. 100 were exclusively office-based, 13 p. 100 only worked in hospitals, and 44 p. 100 were practicing both in office and hospital. The overall utilisation of gloves by French dermatologists remained highly variable, depending on the procedure. For example 6.7 p. 100 of responders reported never using gloves for excisions, 13 p. 100 for shave biopsies, 18 p. 100 for punch biopsies, 40 p. 100 for curettage and 47 p. 100 for electrocoagulation. Five per cent of the dermatologists surveyed did not sterilize their curettes regularly and 42 p. 100 their electrocoagulation needles. Heat sterilization was the most commonly used, in 69 p. 100 of cases for curettes and 42 p. 100 for electrocoagulation needles. On the other hand, chemical tray sterilization was used in 58 p. 100 of the cases for electrocoagulation needles, and in 31 p. 100 for curettes. For chemical sterilization, 63 p. 100 of responders used alcohol, 15 p. 100 glutaraldehyde, 15 p. 100 sodium hydrochloride, and 7 p. 100 other agents, mainly quartenary ammonium compounds. Twelve per cent of the physicians surveyed have adopted the practice of using a single electrocoagulation needle, belonging to each patient, for long term repeated procedures.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Introduction. The magnitude of skin disease in the United States

Skin disease is common in the United States and accounts for a considerable fraction of all outpatient visits. Dermatologists care for more skin disease visits than any other single specialty, while still accounting for a minority of visits overall. The data presented in this introduction, from 1997, do not show a drastic drop in the number of visits to dermatologists as might be feared to occur with the growth in managed care. These visits for skin disease represent a considerable disease burden in the United States. Skin disease is not simply a cosmetic problem. As the data on psoriasis show, skin disease has a tremendous impact on HRQL. The magnitude of this impact on the individual patient is comparable to the impact of other medical disorders.     

Management of vitiligo patients and attitude of dermatologists towards vitiligo

As vitiligo does not cause any physical impairment, it is often considered unimportant by physicians. Vitiligo patients repeatedly experience disinterest from the medical world regarding their skin problem. A questionnaire survey was used to assess the management of vitiligo patients and the attitude of dermatologists towards vitiligo in Belgium. Vitiligo patients (n = 244) visiting an academic affiliated dermatology department were included and 454 out of 558 Belgian dermatologists returned a mailed questionnaire. Vitiligo patients do not often visit a doctor concerning their disease and do not often treat their disease. Disease severity as reported by the patient is correlated with the number of doctor visits (p = 0.001) but not to treatment of the disease. Information about the treatment and physician's encouragement to treat seem important in motivating patients to treat their vitiligo, but 50% of the patients were not adequately informed about their disease and its treatment during their first doctor visit. Today, nearly all the dermatologists report widely informing their patients, but only 36% of them encourage their patients to treat their disease, being pessimistic concerning expected treatment results. Interestingly, two thirds of the patients who ever treated their disease find it worthwhile.     

The emerging role of physician assistants in the delivery of dermatologic health care

The NAMCS provides a wealth of information on use of PAs in all practices, including dermatology. Two important points regarding the NAMCS and SDPA data are addressed here: the number of visits to PAs for dermatologic symptoms and the expected growth of PA use in dermatologists' offices. Dermatologic symptoms were evaluated frequently by PAs, accounting for 14% of PA visits. These statistics do not address the number of referrals those PAs made to dermatologists. Perhaps PAs as a group should be targeted for increased dermatologic education, particularly stressing the need for appropriate referral to a dermatologist. PAs could increase the number of dermatology referrals from primary care offices with improved understanding of the importance of the dermatologist in the management of patients' overall skin health. At projected growth rates, the number of PAs employed by dermatologists should exceed 500 by the end of 2000. Most of this growth has been in private practices and rarely in HMOs or in large multispecialty clinics. There are a number of reasons for this growth, as follows: A PA may help reduce the patient load on the dermatologist, especially with sameday appointments and drop-ins. Some dermatologists are moving away from clinical dermatology into cosmetics, which not only leaves a vacuum in clinical dermatology, but also creates job opportunities for PAs in cosmetic dermatology. Regarding managed care growth, PAs can have a positive impact on the problem of having to see more patients for less money. PAs are cost-effective. In the 1998 SDPA survey, the ratio of billings generated (production) to gross income for the average dermatology PA ranged from 3:1 to 6:1. Even with inexperienced PAs new to dermatology, this ratio was usually at least 2:1 at the end of the first year. PAs can cover satellite offices, allowing for practice expansion. Effective with the new Medicare laws of January 1, 1998, PAs can now see new Medicare patients or Medicare patients with new conditions without the physician being on site, opening up the possibility for satellite offices in remote areas. Just as dermatologists may move toward specialization in surgery, cosmetics, or medical dermatology, PAs may do the same, filling a niche in a particular practice. As in other specialties, patient acceptance of seeing dermatology PAs has not been a significant problem. Continued access to the dermatologist remains unfettered, but, over time, many patients become willing to see either. Are PAs likely to become future competitors of dermatologists? Genuinely concerned dermatologists worry that a dermatology-trained PA will become part of a gatekeeper system that impedes patient access to dermatologists. This is not happening and is not at all likely to become a trend, for a number of reasons. First, primary care cannot compete with dermatology practices in remuneration for PAs. Just as financial benefits in high-production specialty practices entice physicians, the same benefits entice PAs as well. Second, according to member surveys of the SDPA, virtually 100% of fellow members work with dermatologists. Although PAs can work in any type of practice and evaluate dermatologic symptoms just as a general practitioner would, PAs who specialize in dermatology primarily practice with dermatologists, a collegial association most PAs seek out. PAs have steadfastly maintained their dependent, noncompetitive relationship with physicians and would not have it any other way. Although PAs see a good number of patients (2.8 million) with dermatologic symptoms, the NAMCS data indicate that most (72%) of these patients are also seen by a physician. Third, physicians are ultimately responsible for the actions of their PA employee. A general practitioner not trained to perform excisions or manage certain dermatologic conditions should not allow a PA to perform such duties. Similar to much of medicine, the PA profession continues to evolve, with many members moving awa     

Physicians' and patients' perspectives on office-based dispensing: the central role of the physician-patient relationship

OBJECTIVE: To describe physicians' and patients' reasons for participating in office-based sales of dermatologic products. DESIGN: Survey data on the attitudes, opinions, and beliefs of dermatologists and their patients were analyzed. SETTING: A market research study of office-based selling. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty dermatologists involved in direct selling from the office, 20 dermatologists not involved in direct selling, 22 patients who purchase products from their dermatologists' offices, and 25 office managers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The hypotheses of this study were formulated after the market research study had been done. The main outcome measure was the physicians' and patients' reported reasons for patients purchasing skin care products from dermatologists rather than from retail stores. RESULTS: "Trust" was the most frequent reason cited by physicians for patient purchases, while "physician knowledge" was the most frequent reason cited by the purchasing patients. The most common location to display the products was the waiting room (20 [67%] of the physicians). The most common types of products sold included glycolic acid products (15 [50%]), moisturizers (13 [43%]), sunscreens (12 [40%]), and alpha-hydroxy acid products other than glycolic acid (9 [30%]). CONCLUSION: The interaction between physicians who sell products in their offices and their patients is highlighted by 2 key elements of the physician-patient relationship: trust and physician knowledge.     

French people and skin diseases: results of a survey using a representative sample

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate, from the patients' viewpoint, the prevalence, management, and impact of main dermatologic disorders in France. DESIGN: Survey conducted from March 28 to May 6, 2002, with the Sofres Taylor Nelson Institute on 10,000 households using 1 questionnaire per household. SETTING: General community. PATIENTS: A total of 25,441 subjects from 10,000 households determined to be representative of the French population and regularly surveyed by the Taylor Nelson Sofres Institute. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimation of the prevalence of skin disorders by the French population. RESULTS: Of the 10 000 households, 7466 (74.7%) returned the questionnaire, which was completed for 18,137 (71.3%) of the 25,441 subjects. Of those, 15,742 reported having had skin problems since birth, or, by extrapolation, 86.8% (47.29 million) of the French population; 7841 reported having had skin problems in the past 24 months, or, by extrapolation, 43.2% (23.53 million) of the French population; and 28.7% said that their skin problems impaired their daily life. However, 61% of the sample were satisfied with their dermatologist. CONCLUSION: This survey of perceived health status in France highlights both the prevalence of skin disorders and the underestimation of the effects of dermatologic disorders in public health. A majority of the French population is satisfied with the care supplied by dermatologists.     

Dermatologists and Allergists Have Far More Experience and Use More Complex Treatment Regimens in the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis Than Other Physicians

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a prevalent skin condition, especially in the pediatric population. Whereas it has been shown that dermatologists prefer using more intensive therapy for AD than generalists, actual drug utilization has not been quantified. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to characterize visits for and treatment of AD in the office-based setting. METHODS: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data from 1990 to 1997 was analyzed to determine the use of topical corticosteroids (including their relative potencies), oral antibiotics, and oral antihistamines in the treatment of AD. RESULTS: There were an estimated 900,000 outpatient visits per year for AD. If in some visits to generalists the diagnosis for AD was miscoded as contact dermatitis, there may have been as many as 3 million outpatient visits per year for AD. Topical corticosteroids were used in 67% of visits with a mean potency rank of 4.5 (4.3, 4.8 95% CI). Dermatologists saw 48% of all visits for AD (63 yearly visits/physician) and allergists saw 10% of visits (30 yearly visits/physician). Other physicians saw from 0.1 to 2 yearly visits per physician. Dermatologists were the most likely to use topical corticosteroids (81% of visits) and high-potency corticosteroid agents (22% of visits). Dermatologists and allergists were the only physicians to prescribe ultrahigh-potent corticosteroid agents (12% and 9% of visits, respectively) and were more likely than other physicians to use multiple-agent regimens (21% and 27% of visits treated with a corticosteroid agent, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dermatologists and allergists have more expertise in the management of AD than other physicians, as suggested by their higher per capita visits and greater use of complex topical corticosteroid regimens.     

Dermatologic Services Provided to Children and Adolescents by Primary Care and Other Physicians in the United States

Abstract: To determine the frequency and types of pediatric dermatologic problems encountered by primary care physicians, dermatologists, and other physicians, we examined data from the 1990 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, a continuing study of physician practice in the United States. In 1990, 163·3 million physician office visits were made by patients 18 years of age or younger for all diagnoses; of these, 126·2 million were to primary care physicians. Among visits to these providers, a primary, secondary, or tertiary cutaneous concern or diagnosis was recorded in 12·3 million visits (9·7%). Of these patients with a primary cutaneous concern, 68% of visits were made to primary care physicians, 21% to dermatologists, and 10% to other physicians. For encounters in which primary care physicians reported a primary dermatologic diagnosis (9·6 million visits, 7·6%), the majority of diagnoses (86–93%) were in one of five categories: skin Infections, dermatitis, parasitic infestations, acne, or urticaria. This analysis demonstrates the great frequency with which cutaneous disease occurs in ambulatory medicine, and reinforces the Importance of dermatologic education in the training of primary care physicians.     

Allergists and dermatologists have far more expertise in caring for patients with urticaria than other specialists

BACKGROUND: Urticaria is a common disease for which numerous treatments have been described, yet there is little information about what agents are commonly used to treat urticaria. There may be differences in the way in which urticaria is treated by different medical specialties. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the visits and treatments of urticaria in office-based practices. METHODS: National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data from 1990 to 1997 were analyzed to determine patient populations, medications used, and physician specialties for visits of urticaria. RESULTS: Women accounted for 69% of all patient visits, but an equal gender distribution was observed in patients 18 years of age and younger. There was a bimodal age distribution with peak visits in patients aged birth to 9 years and 30 to 40 years. H(1) antihistamines and systemic corticosteroids were used in 56% and 14% of visits, respectively. Other medications reported as useful in the treatment of urticaria were used in 12% of visits. Allergists and dermatologists had a mean of 47 and 37 visits per physician per year, respectively, compared with all other physicians who averaged fewer than 10 visits per physician per year. Allergists were the least likely to use a corticosteroid agent (6% of visits), whereas internists were the most likely (29% of visits). Dermatology and allergy recorded a relatively large percentage of visits for urticaria that were referred for their condition by other physicians (49% and 25% of visits, respectively). CONCLUSION: We observed a bimodal utilization curve for age and urticaria not previously described. H(1) antihistamines remain the mainstay in treatment of urticaria, whereas the low use of systemic corticosteroids likely reflects physicians' understanding of their secondary function in the treatment of urticaria.     

Management of Spitz nevi: a survey of dermatologists in the United States

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus concerning management of Spitz nevi. OBJECTIVE: This study was carried out to ascertain how dermatologists manage Spitz nevi. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 997 fellows of the American Academy of Dermatology, 284 pediatric dermatologists, and 27 directors of pigmented-lesion clinics. The results are based on the 381 questionnaires returned. RESULTS: The vast majority of responding dermatologists (93%) recommend biopsies of suspected Spitz nevi. Of this group, 43% recommend total biopsies and 55% recommend partial biopsies; 2% would recommend either total or partial biopsies, depending on the clinical situation. Sixty-nine percent of physicians would completely excise a lesion that was histologically diagnosed as an incompletely removed Spitz nevus. Seventy percent of general dermatologists and 80% of pediatric dermatologists would recommend excision with a 1- to 2-mm margin of normal-appearing skin around a Spitz nevus. Nine percent of general dermatologists would recommend margins of 4 mm or more; however, all pediatric dermatologists surveyed would recommend margins less than 4 mm. Physicians were less likely to monitor patients whose Spitz nevi were completely removed. Three fourths (74%) of respondents believe Spitz nevi are entirely benign, 4% believe they are precursors to melanoma, and 22% are not sure. Seven percent of general dermatologists and 4% of pediatric dermatologists have seen metastatic melanomas arise at sites of lesions initially diagnosed histologically as Spitz nevi; 40% of pigmented-lesion clinic directors have seen such lesions. CONCLUSIONS: We believe that the lack of consensus, both in our survey and in the medical literature, reflects to some extent the lack of certainty in the histologic differentiation of Spitz nevi from melanomas and that concern about melanoma influences management. At the pigmented-lesion clinic of the New York University Skin and Cancer Unit, because of this concern about melanoma, it is usually recommended that Spitz nevi be completely excised.