Main Article Content
skin cancer, melanoma, dysplastic nevi, diagnostic accuracy, confidence
Introduction: Nevisense is a non-invasive device that measures electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) of individual skin lesions to aid in the diagnosis of melanoma. While EIS has demonstrated high sensitivity in diagnosing melanoma, its impact on a clinician’s diagnostic confidence remains unknown.
Objective: To conduct a pilot study to evaluate whether clinician diagnostic confidence, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy can be increased by adding EIS measurement scores to clinical and dermoscopic images of lesions clinically suspicious for melanoma.
Methods: Three pigmented lesions specialists and three 4th year medical students completed an online survey to evaluate 34 melanocytic lesions suspicious for melanoma. For each lesion, participants provided their diagnosis, biopsy recommendation, and confidence in diagnosing a lesion as benign or malignant based on history and clinical and dermoscopic images, and again after receiving an EIS score.
Results: Addition of EIS scores increased mean biopsy sensitivity for melanoma/severely dysplastic nevi from 70% to 84% (p = .014) and mean diagnostic accuracy from 74% to 86% (p = .005). Mean diagnostic confidence increased for all histopathologic categories for both students and dermatologists (all p < .05).
Conclusions: In this pilot study, EIS increased novice and expert diagnosticians’ confidence regarding dermoscopically equivocal melanocytic lesions. Further studies are needed to explore how EIS can help clinicians reassure patients regarding the management of clinically dysplastic melanocytic nevi.
2. Fried L, Tan A, Bajaj S, Liebman TN, Polsky D, Stein JA. Technological advances for the detection of melanoma: Advances in molecular techniques. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2020;83(4):996-1004.
3. Carli P, De Giorgi V, Crocetti E, et al. Improvement of malignant/benign ratio in excised melanocytic lesions in the 'dermoscopy era': a retrospective study 1997-2001. The British journal of dermatology. 2004;150(4):687-692.
4. Fried L, Tan A, Bajaj S, Liebman TN, Polsky D, Stein JA. Technological advances for the detection of melanoma: Advances in diagnostic techniques. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2020;83(4):983-992.
5. Kittler H, Pehamberger H, Wolff K, Binder M. Diagnostic accuracy of dermoscopy. The Lancet Oncology. 2002;3(3):159-165.
6. 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. British Journal of Dermatology. 2009;161(6):1270-1277.
7. Wolner ZJ, Yélamos O, Liopyris K, Rogers T, Marchetti MA, Marghoob AA. Enhancing Skin Cancer Diagnosis with Dermoscopy. Dermatologic clinics. 2017;35(4):417-437.
8. Benvenuto-Andrade C, Dusza SW, Hay JL, et al. Level of confidence in diagnosis: clinical examination versus dermoscopy examination. Dermatologic surgery : official publication for American Society for Dermatologic Surgery [et al]. 2006;32(5):738-744.
9. Hecimovich MD, Volet SE. Importance of building confidence in patient communication and clinical skills among chiropractic students. The Journal of chiropractic education. 2009;23(2):151-164.
10. Baranski JV, Petrusic WM. Probing the locus of confidence judgments: Experiments on the time to determine confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 1998;24(3):929-945.
11. Parle M, Maguire P, Heaven C. The development of a training model to improve health professionals' skills, self-efficacy and outcome expectancies when communicating with cancer patients. Social Science & Medicine. 1997;44(2):231-240.
12. Giroldi E, Veldhuijzen W, Mannaerts A, van der Weijden T, Bareman F, van der Vleuten C. “Doctor, please tell me it’s nothing serious”: an exploration of patients’ worrying and reassuring cognitions using stimulated recall interviews. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15(1):73.
13. Malvehy J, Hauschild A, Curiel-Lewandrowski C, et al. Clinical performance of the Nevisense system in cutaneous melanoma detection: an international, multicentre, prospective and blinded clinical trial on efficacy and safety. Br J Dermatol. 2014;171(5):1099-1107.
14. Svoboda RM, Prado G, Mirsky RS, Rigel DS. Assessment of clinician accuracy for diagnosing melanoma on the basis of electrical impedance spectroscopy score plus morphology versus lesion morphology alone. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2019;80(1):285-287.
15. Litchman GH, Teplitz RW, Marson J, Rigel DS. Impact of Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy on Dermatologists’ Number-Needed-to-Biopsy Metric and Biopsy Decisions for Pigmented Skin Lesions. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2020.
16. Litchman GH, Marson, J. W., Svoboda, R. M., & Rigel, D. S. Integrating Electrical Impedance Spectroscopy into Clinical Decisions for Pigmented Skin Lesions Improves Diagnostic Accuracy: A Multitiered Study. SKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine. 2020;4(5):424-430.
17. Baratloo A, Hosseini M, Negida A, El Ashal G. Part 1: Simple Definition and Calculation of Accuracy, Sensitivity and Specificity. Emergency (Tehran, Iran). 2015;3(2):48-49.
18. Parikh R, Mathai A, Parikh S, Chandra Sekhar G, Thomas R. Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Indian journal of ophthalmology. 2008;56(1):45-50.
19. Dang BN, Westbrook RA, Njue SM, Giordano TP. Building trust and rapport early in the new doctor-patient relationship: a longitudinal qualitative study. BMC medical education. 2017;17(1):32.
20. Holt N, Pincus T. Developing and testing a measure of consultation-based reassurance for people with low back pain in primary care: A cross-sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2016;17.