Subject(s)
Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous , Mycobacterium chelonae , Peritoneal Dialysis , Peritonitis , Humans , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/diagnosis , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/drug therapy , Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous/etiology , Peritoneal Dialysis/adverse effects , Peritonitis/etiology , Peritonitis/microbiologyABSTRACT
We investigated the variations in physician evaluation of skin photodamage based on a published photodamage scale. Of interest is the utility of a 10-level scale ranging from none and mild photodamage to actinic keratosis (AK). The dorsal forearms of 55 adult subjects with various amounts of photodamage were considered. Each forearm was independently evaluated by 15 board-certified dermatologists according to the Global Assessment Severity Scale ranging from 0 (less severe) to 9 (the most progressed stage of skin damage). Dermatologists rated the levels of photodamage based upon the photographs in blinded fashion. Results show substantial disagreement amongst the dermatologists on the severity of photodamage. Our results indicate that ratings could be more consistent if using a scale of less levels (5-levels or 3-levels). Ultimately, clinicians can use this knowledge to provide better interpretation of inter-rater evaluations and provide more reliable assessment and frequent monitoring of high-risk populations.
ABSTRACT
We investigated the change in optical properties and vascular parameters to characterize skin tissue from mild photodamage to actinic keratosis (AK) with comparison to a published photodamage scale. Multi-wavelength spatial frequency domain imaging (SFDI) measurements were performed on the dorsal forearms of 55 adult subjects with various amounts of photodamage. Dermatologists rated the levels of photodamage based upon the photographs in blinded fashion to allow comparison with SFDI data. For characterization of statistical data, we used artificial neural networks. Our results indicate that optical and vascular parameters can be used to quantify photodamage and can discriminate between the stages as low, medium, and high grades, with the best performance of â¼70%, â¼76% and 80% for characterization of low- medium- and high-grade lesions, respectively. Ultimately, clinicians can use this noninvasive approach for risk assessment and frequent monitoring of high-risk populations.
