AMM 344: Revamping Dermatology: Beyond Fitzpatrick at Oklahoma Health
February 02, 2025
This episode delves into the challenges of using the Fitzpatrick Skin Type scale in dermatology, highlighting a recent study from the University of Oklahoma Health Physicians Dermatology Clinic. The study reveals discrepancies between patient and provider assessments of skin types, particularly among diverse racial and ethnic groups. It underscores the flaw in equating the Fitzpatrick scale directly with racial identity and advocates for more culturally relevant language and thorough history-taking to enhance dermatologic care. This episode explores the potential for improved patient care through these suggested changes.
Quick Takes
- Significant discord between patient and provider assessments of skin types across diverse racial and ethnic groups
- Healthcare providers often incorrectly assign skin types based on skin tone alone
- Advocacy for refining language used in skin type assessments and emphasizing thorough history-taking over visual assessments for more accurate patient care
Episode Transcript
Today is February 2nd, 2025, and we’re diving into a topic that challenges the norms in dermatology. The Fitzpatrick Skin Type scale has been a staple since its introduction by Dr. Thomas B. Fitzpatrick in 1975 for estimating ultraviolet dosage in skin treatments. However, a recent study from the University of Oklahoma Health Physicians Dermatology Clinic shines a light on significant discord between patient and provider assessments of skin types, particularly across diverse racial and ethnic groups.
The study finds that healthcare providers often incorrectly assign skin types based on skin tone alone, leading to potential misjudgments in dermatologic care. This issue is compounded by the common yet flawed practice of equating the Fitzpatrick scale directly with racial identity—a notion Dr. Fitzpatrick himself refuted over 35 years ago, emphasizing that race and ethnicity are social constructs.
The research advocates refining the language used in skin type assessments, recommending culturally relevant terminology to replace traditional terms like “tan,” which may not resonate with all patients. The study emphasizes thorough history-taking over visual assessment to better guide treatment and minimize risks. As dermatologists push for improved methods, this shift could lead to more accurate patient care, tailor-made to fit diverse backgrounds. Stay tuned for more advancements in the field, and until next time, take care!