Prior authorizations in dermatology and impact on patient care: An updated survey of US dermatology providers and staff by the American Academy of Dermatology.

BACKGROUND: Completing prior authorizations (PAs) can be a lengthy process, which can delay access to appropriate care. A 2017 American Academy of Dermatology survey highlighted that PAs are common across many dermatologic medication classes. However, little is known regarding the impact of PAs on patient care and resource use. METHODS: To better characterize the burden of PAs on dermatology practices and their effects on patient care, a survey was conducted in February 2020 among U.S.-based dermatologists (N=3,000) and the Association of Dermatology Administrators/Managers (ADAM) members (N=718). RESULTS: Respondents reported 24% of patients require PAs. Dermatologists and staff spend a mean of 3.3 hours/day on PAs. Sixty percent of dermatologists reported interrupting patient visits for PAs. Sixty-five percent respondents reported PAs were required for clobetasol, 76% for tretinoin, and 42% for 5-fluorouracil. Respondents noted 45% of PA determinations took beyond one week and 17% took beyond two weeks. Respondents reported 12% of PAs resulted in delaying or abandoning treatment and 17% resulted in less appropriate treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Prior authorization burden remains high and consumes substantial clinical resources, which may negatively impact patient care. Additionally, they result in prolonged treatment delays and are associated with delaying treatment, abandoning treatment, or using lesser treatment.

Idiopathic Hypereosinophilic Syndrome With Cutaneous Manifestations and Flame Figures: A Spectrum of Eosinophilic Dermatoses Whose Features Overlap With Wells' Syndrome.

IMPORTANCE: Wells syndrome (WS) (eosinophilic cellulitis) is an uncommon eosinophilic dermatitis that has been rarely described in association with, but distinct from, hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). OBSERVATIONS: We report a case of an eosinophilic dermatosis with flame figures in association with idiopathic HES, manifested by inflammatory myocarditis, asthma, and peripheral blood eosinophilia. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The diagnoses of WS and HES, rather than being distinct findings, may represent 2 entities on a spectrum of hypereosinophilic diseases. The diagnosis of WS should be made with caution and should prompt a thorough investigation that includes a work-up for a systemic eosinophilic disorder.

Skin manifestations of outpatient adverse drug events in the United States: a national analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous reactions to drugs are among the most common clinical manifestations of adverse drug events (ADEs); however, data on outpatient cutaneous adverse drug events (CADEs) are limited. PURPOSE: To provide national estimates of outpatient CADEs and determine their most frequent causes. METHODS: Outpatient CADEs recorded in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) between 1995 and 2005 were analyzed. The national incidence of outpatient CADEs in those seeking medical attention in the United States was estimated, and the common medication classes implicated with CADEs were identified. RESULTS: There were a mean annual total of 635,982 CADE-related visits, resulting in an annual incidence of 2.26 CADEs per 1,000 persons. Patients took an average of 2.2 medications in addition to the one causing the CADE. The incidence of CADEs increased with age, with a peak in the age group from 70 to 79 years. The medications most frequently causing a CADE were antimicrobial agents. Dermatitis and urticaria were the two main types of skin reactions reported. CONCLUSIONS: CADEs occur less frequently in outpatients than in inpatients and result in few hospital admissions. Physicians must be particularly cognizant of the occurrence of CADEs when prescribing antimicrobial agents.