Search

In conclusion, while it helped substitute many in-person consultations when necessary, TD did not to take off during the COVID-19 pandemic. The monthly number of scheduled consultations, dermatological emergency unit (DEU) visits, LI TD consultations and SF TD requests were retrieved from January 2019 to December 2020. I To the Editor, i During the first COVID-19 pandemic wave, dermatologists were urged to postpone non-urgent and outpatient visits,1 to limit COVID-19 spreading. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses the issue of diagnostic wandering in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), a skin condition that affects a small percentage of the population. The study conducted in France found that misdiagnosis of HS is common, leading to delays in proper treatment. Factors such as gender, age, income, and education level were associated with diagnostic wandering, with women more likely to experience delays. The study suggests that targeted education for medical professionals could help reduce delays and improve outcomes for HS patients. [Extracted from the article]

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Background: Diagnosing red legs on first presentation is challenging. There exists a lack of robustly developed and validated diagnostic red leg tools in clinical practice. Physicians fear missing cases of infectious red legs and treat many patients unnecessarily with antibiotics., Objective: Develop and validate easy-to-use diagnostic tools applicable at bedside of patients to orient diagnosis of the commonest and most serious causes of infectious red legs (non-necrotizing bacterial dermohypodermitis (NNBDH), and necrotizing fasciitis (NF)) versus the commonest inflammatory cause (eczema)., Methods: We collected data of patients presenting to our dermatology department from January first 2012 until May 17th 2017 with a diagnosis of red leg. Three models were developed using fast frugal trees. Validation was performed in a second cohort of patients., Results: A total of 187 patients (mean age 56, SD = 21 years, 48.1% women) were included in the development phase and 62 patients (mean age 64, SD = 19, 52% women) in the validation phase. In the validation data set, sensitivity and specificity were respectively 67% and 91% for NNBDH, 83% and 66%, for NF and 88% and 93%, for eczema., Conclusion: Presentations of suspected lower-limb infections are commonly misdiagnosed, resulting in avoidable antibiotic prescription and hospitalization. We developed an easy-to-use clinical diagnostic tool applicable at the bedside of patients to help orient physicians in certain situations and avoid unnecessary initiation of antibiotics. Future work should focus on validating this tool in primary care to minimize misdiagnosis of red legs and overprescription of antibiotics., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Very few studies have evaluated the global prevalence of pruritus., Objectives: To assess its prevalence according to age, sex, ethnicity and geographic region., Methods: An international cross-sectional study was conducted in 20 countries from January to April 2023. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire on sociodemographics, and to confirm the presence or absence of a skin disease in the last 12 months and the presence or absence of pruritus in the last 7 days., Results: The studied sample included 50 552 individuals. The worldwide prevalence of pruritus was 39.8%. The age group ≥ 65 years had the highest prevalence (43.3%). The prevalence was 40.7% among women and 38.9% among men (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between ethnicities (P = 0.14). Compared with North America (41.2%), the prevalence of pruritus was significantly lower in Europe (35.9%, P < 0.001), Australia (38.4%, P = 0.017), East Asia (40.2%, P = 0.04) and Latin America (36.5%, P < 0.001), and higher in Africa (45.7%, P = 0.007). No significant difference was found with the Middle East (40.2%, P = 0.36). The prevalence of pruritus in BRICS countries (40.3%) was significantly higher than that in developed countries (38.7%) (P < 10-3)., Conclusions: Out analysis is limited because there is no information about the severity or type (acute, chronic) of pruritus. The global prevalence of pruritus revealed age, sex and geographic region differences, with no ethnic differences., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest M.S.A., N.P.C. and C.B. are employed by the Pierre Fabre Laboratory. G.Y., C.S., C.T., M.I., Y.B.H., B.H., M.A.R. and L.M. have no conflicts of interest in this study., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: As exposure to UV radiation is the primary modifiable environmental risk factor associated with skin cancer, it remains the principal focus of most prevention strategies. Numerous sun protection campaigns have been implemented worldwide; however, their impact on the actual incidence and mortality rates of skin cancer seems to be limited. To create successful skin cancer prevention campaigns, it is important to have a comprehensive understanding of individuals' attitudes and behaviours regarding sun protection. The aim of the current study was to determine and report on the prevalence of self-reported attitudes, knowledge and behaviours regarding two of the major sun protection recommendations-avoidance of sun exposure and use of sunscreens-in an international representative sample across five continents., Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 20 countries using a web-based online survey., Findings: A total of 50,552 individuals, comprising 25,388 men (50.22%) and 25,164 women (49.78%), participated in the survey. Among them, 83.2% reported having been voluntarily exposed to the sun (for sun-basking reasons) at least once in the last 12 months, and 47.96% acknowledged being exposed to the sun between the hours of 10 AM and 4 PM. The primary reason for non-adherence was that these hours were the most convenient times (32.28%). Only 24.05% reported applying sunscreen every 2 h when outdoors. Forgetfulness was the primary reason as provided by 27.79% of participants. Males and older age groups were less likely to adopt sun-protective behaviours around the world. Forgetfulness and the challenges posed by time constraints seem to be the biggest barriers to proper adherence., Interpretation: These findings should prompt the collaboration with health authorities and the manufacturers to enhance adherence by setting reasonable sunscreen prices and creating formulations that make their application less burdensome., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)