P029 Targeted skin examinations: a reasonable compromise?

Aswatha Rabindranathnambi,Modupe Ojelabi,Georgina Elston

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae090.056

IF: 11.113

2024-06-28

British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract:Abstract There has been a significant increase in referrals for suspected skin cancer since March 2021, resulting in busy urgent skin cancer clinics across the country. Gold-standard care would include a full-skin examination for all patients referred via this route to ensure other incidental lesions are not missed, but full-skin examinations are time-consuming and decrease the total number of patients who can be seen in clinic. There is only limited evidence regarding the benefits of full-skin examinations. We conducted a service evaluation: a retrospective review of all ‘new’ patients referred to a 2-week-wait skin cancer clinic in a district general hospital over a 12-month period (January to December 2022). All 205 patients were offered a full-skin examination, of whom 175 accepted full- or partial-skin examination. Overall, 21% (37 of 175) had incidental lesions identified that either warranted treatment or were concerning enough to need photography and further monitoring. Forty-four incidental lesions were picked up in total. The majority were actinic keratoses (n = 7) and basal cell cancers (n = 12). The other incidental lesions were atypical naevi (n = 8), intraepidermal carcinoma (n = 4), lentigo maligna (n = 1), vulval melanosis (n = 1) and malignant melanoma (n = 1). Importantly, most of the incidental lesions were seen in those > 50 years of age (92%) and were on the head and neck or upper body (89%). The majority of these patients (89% of those who had it documented) were found to have Fitzpatrick skin phototypes I or II. Our results suggest that examining the upper body in those > 50 years of age with skin type I and II has the highest yield of picking up further skin lesions that are either cancerous or could be precancerous. This upper-body, targeted skin examination has the potential to avoid further referrals, thus saving time and resources in the long run, for patients and primary and secondary care. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact on ‘hard’ outcomes such as morbidity and mortality rates, as well as potential cost benefits.

dermatology