CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Managementmelanin and skin pigmentationInnovations in Medical Education

Dermoscopy use in UK primary care: a survey of GP s with a special interest in dermatology

Open access
Jones, O.T., Jurascheck, L.C., Utukuri, M., Pannebakker, M.M., Emery, J., Walter, F.M.·2019·Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
DOI 10.1111/jdv.15614PMC PMC6767170
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Melanoma accounts for 90% of skin cancer mortality and typically presents in primary care, where it can be challenging to distinguish from benign lesions. Dermoscopy is a tool for skin visualization that is routinely used for melanoma diagnosis in secondary care. However, the role of dermoscopy in primary care remains unclear. Objectives: To determine views on, and use of, dermoscopy by dermatology‐interested general practitioners (GP s). Methods: An online questionnaire was emailed to the UK Primary Care Dermatology Society members in February 2018, and responses collected over the following 4 weeks. Results: A total of 205 responses were analysed. Most respondents were GP s (94%), aged over 50 (53%), had a postgraduate dermatological qualification (67%) and used dermoscopy regularly when reviewing pigmented skin lesions (97%). Dermoscopy use was commoner amongst GP s who had worked longer in primary care and had experience of secondary care dermatology. Most had undertaken training in dermoscopy (91%), although one‐fifth (20%) had not updated their training in over 5 years. Most of those who had received only 1 day of face‐to‐face training reported feeling confident using a dermatoscope. Few respondents (11%) reported access to teledermatology or teledermoscopy for urgent or routine referrals. Conclusions: UK GP s with a special interest in dermatology are routinely using dermoscopy in the primary care setting. More research is needed to establish optimal approaches to training and updating GP dermoscopy skills. When dermoscopy has been shown to be safe, effective, acceptable and cost‐effective in this setting, more GP s may also be able to gain and maintain the skills to implement dermoscopy into routine primary care. Technological advances, including incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms to guide GP s, could also contribute to widening use of dermoscopy among GP s.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jdv.15614

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dermoscopy adds additional value in primary care when used by an expert or trained user.

    “Dermoscopy adds additional value in primary care when used by an expert or trained user27–30.”

    From Dermoscopy practice guidelines for use in telemedicine (2022) · cites this paper as [30]

    The Introduction (page not supplied) says that limited evidence suggests dermoscopy with training improves diagnostic accuracy in primary care and reduces unnecessary excisions and referrals. It also says the evidence is limited and the training needed for meaningful improvement is unclear, so the unqualified claim of added value is stronger than the source supports. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. [1]Garbe C, Peris K, Hauschild A et al Diagnosis and treatment of melanoma. European consensus‐based interdisciplinary guideline ‐ Update 2016. Eur J Cancer 2016; 63: 201– 217. 27367293
  2. [2]Erdmann F, Lortet‐Tieulent J, Schuz J et al International trends in the incidence of malignant melanoma 1953‐2008–are recent generations at higher or lower risk? Int J Cancer 2013; 132: 385– 400. 22532371
  3. [3]Arnold M, Holterhues C, Hollestein LM et al Trends in incidence and predictions of cutaneous melanoma across Europe up to 2015. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2014; 28: 1170– 1178. 23962170
  4. [4]Leiter U, Garbe C. Epidemiology of Melanoma and Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer—The Role of Sunlight. In: Reichrath J, ed. Sunlight, Vitamin D and Skin Cancer. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. Vol. 624. Springer, New York, NY, 2008; 89– 103. 18348450
  5. [5]Mistry M, Parkin DM, Ahmad AS, Sasieni P. Cancer incidence in the United Kingdom: projections to the year 2030. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 1795– 1803. 22033277 PMC3242594
  6. [7]Walter FM, Morris HC, Humphrys E et al Effect of adding a diagnostic aid to best practice to manage suspicious pigmented lesions in primary care: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2012; 345: e4110. 22763392 PMC3389518
  7. [8]Rosendahl C, Cameron A, McColl I, Wilkinson D. Dermatoscopy in routine practice ‐ “Chaos and Clues”. Aust Fam Physician 2012; 41: 482– 487. 22762066
  8. [9]Rosendahl C, Tschandl P, Cameron A, Kittler H. Diagnostic accuracy of dermatoscopy for melanocytic and nonmelanocytic pigmented lesions. J Am Acad Dermatol 2011; 64: 1068– 1073. 21440329
  9. [10]Bafounta M, Beauchet A, Aegerter P, Saiag P. Is dermoscopy (Epiluminescence Microscopy) useful for the diagnosis of melanoma? Arch Dermatol 2001; 137: 1343– 1350. 11594860
  10. [11]Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. Lancet Oncol 2002; 3: 159– 165. 11902502
  11. [12]Vestergaard ME, Menzies SW. Automated diagnostic instruments for cutaneous melanoma. Semin Cutan Med Surg 2008 Mar; 27: 32– 36. 18486022
  12. [13]Marsden JR, Newton‐Bishop JA, Burrows L et al Revised U.K. guidelines for the management of cutaneous melanoma 2010. Br J Dermatol 2010; 163: 238– 256. 20608932
  13. [14]Butler TD, Matin RN, Affleck AG, Fleming CJ, Bowling JC. Trends in dermoscopy use in the UK: results from surveys in 2003 and 2012. Dermatol Pr Concept 2015; 5: 29– 38. PMC4462896 26114049
  14. [16]Chamberlain AJ, Kelly JW. Use of dermoscopy in Australia. Med J Australia. Australia 2007; 187: 252– 253. 17708733
  15. [18]Pagnanelli G, Soyer HP, Argenziano G et al Diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions by dermoscopy: web‐based training improves diagnostic performance of non‐experts. Br J Dermatol 2003; 148: 698– 702. 12752126
  16. [19]Rogers T, Marino ML, Dusza SW et al A clinical aid for detecting skin cancer: the triage amalgamated dermoscopic algorithm (TADA). J Am Board Fam Med 2016; 29: 694– 701. 28076252 PMC5536949
  17. [20]Secker LJ, Buis PAJ, Bergman W, Kukutsch NA. Effect of a dermoscopy training course on the accuracy of primary care physicians in diagnosing pigmented lesions. Acta Derm Venereol 2017; 97: 263– 265. 27572816
  18. [21]Westerhoff K, McCarthy WH, Menzies SW. Increase in the sensitivity for melanoma diagnosis by primary care physicians using skin surface microscopy. Br J Dermatol 2000; 143: 1016– 1020. 11069512
  19. [22]Binder M, Schwarz M, Winkler A et al Epiluminescence microscopy: a useful tool for the diagnosis of pigmented skin lesions for formally trained dermatologists. Arch Dermatol 1995; 131: 286– 291. 7887657
  20. [23]Binder M, Puespoeck‐Schwarz M, Steiner A et al Epiluminescence microscopy of small pigmented skin lesions: short‐term formal training improves the diagnostic performance of dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol 1997; 36: 197– 202. 9039168
  21. [24]Chappuis P, Duru G, Marchal O, Girier P, Dalle S, Thomas L. Dermoscopy, a useful tool for general practitioners in melanoma screening: a nationwide survey. Br J Dermatology 2016; 175: 744– 750. 26914613
  22. [25]Walter FM, Usher‐Smith JA, Yadlapalli S, Watson E. Caring for people living with, and beyond, cancer: an online survey of GPs in England. Br J Gen Pr 2015; 65: e761– e768. PMC4617271 26500324
  23. [32]General practice in the UK: background briefing [Media Briefing] ‐ BMA Media Centre [Internet]. BMA Media centre: Press briefing papers: British Medical Association; 2017 [cited 2018 Oct 25]. Available from: https://www.bma.org.uk/-/media/files/pdfs/.../press briefings/general‐practice.pdf
  24. [34]Rosendahl C, Williams G, Eley D et al The impact of subspecialization and dermatoscopy use on accuracy of melanoma diagnosis among primary care doctors in Australia. J Am Acad Dermatol 2012; 67: 846– 852. 22325462
  25. [35]Dinnes J, Deeks JJ, Chuchu N et al Dermoscopy, with and without visual inspection, for diagnosing melanoma in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; CD011902. 10.1002/14651858.CD011902.pub2 PMC6517096 30521682 · DOI
  26. [36]Stratton D, Loescher LJ. The acceptance of mobile teledermoscopy by primary care nurse practitioners in the state of Arizona. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract 2016; 28: 287– 293. 26484970
  27. [37]Morris JB, Alfonso SV, Hernandez N, Fernandez MI. Examining the factors associated with past and present dermoscopy use among family physicians. Dermatol Pract Concept 2017; 7: 63– 70. PMC5718128 29214111
  28. [38]Morris JB, Alfonso SV, Hernandez N, Fernandez MI. Use of and intentions to use dermoscopy among physicians in the United States. Dermatol Pract Concept 2017; 7: 7– 16. 28515986 PMC5424655
  29. [39]Koelink C, Vermeulen K, Kollen B et al Diagnostic accuracy and cost‐effectiveness of dermoscopy in primary care: a cluster randomized clinical trial. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2014; 28: 1442– 1449. 25493316
  30. [40]Breton AL, Amini‐Adle M, Duru G, Poulalhon N, Dalle S, Thomas L. Overview of the use of dermoscopy in academic and non‐academic hospital centres in France: a nationwide survey. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2014; 28: 1207– 1213. 23998395
  31. [41]Menzies SW, Emery J, Staples M et al Impact of dermoscopy and short‐term sequential digital dermoscopy imaging for the management of pigmented lesions in primary care: a sequential intervention trial. Br J Dermatol 2009 Dec; 161: 1270– 1277. 19747359

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jones, O. T., Jurascheck, L. C., Utukuri, M., Pannebakker, M. M., Emery, J., & Walter, F. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Jones, O.T.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-05-17
Volume
33
Issue
9
Pages
1706-1712
ISSN
  • 0926-9959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3083
DOI
10.1111/jdv.15614
PMC
PMC6767170
OpenAlex
W2936305131
Cited by
35
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2
FWCI
1.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK (C8640/A23385)
  • National Institute for Health Research (RG 68235)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › melanin and skin pigmentation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
dermoscopy, primary care dermatology, general practitioners, melanoma diagnosis, pigmented skin lesions, teledermoscopy, teledermatology, artificial intelligence in dermatology
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Skin Neoplasms, Dermoscopy, General Practitioners

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review