ABSTRACT
We evaluated our patients' own assessment of the cosmetic outcome of minor dermatological surgery procedures. A postal questionnaire was sent to patients who had undergone surgery between 12 and 18 months previously. Patient satisfaction was correlated with variables, including age, sex, lesion size and site, indication for excision, histological diagnosis and operator. Two hundred and seven excisional procedures were identified in 193 patients. Seventy-nine per cent of the questionnaires (163/207) were returned. Seventy per cent of patients reported that the scar was invisible or better than expected and 9% rated it to be worse than expected. Ninety per cent of patients said they would undergo the procedure again. Patient dissatisfaction was associated significantly and independently with excisions from the back, younger age and benign histology.
Subject(s)
Minor Surgical Procedures , Patient Satisfaction , Skin Diseases/surgery , Adult , Aged , Esthetics , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Minor Surgical Procedures/methods , Probability , Retrospective Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Wound Healing/physiologyABSTRACT
A case of allergic contact dermatitis to cinchocaine is presented to highlight the confusion regarding the classification of, and cross-reactivity between, topical anaesthetic agents and the inadequacy of the use of benzocaine as a single screening agent for topical anaesthetic contact allergy. Our patient presented with a 10-day history of acute perianal dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis to Proctosedyl ointment, which was applied for 3 weeks prior, was suspected. On patch testing, he reacted to cinchocaine, a constituent of Proctosedyl ointment, and to the actual product, but had no reaction to benzocaine or lignocaine.
