Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
BJGP Open
Intended for Healthcare Professionals

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Outreach
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
  • CONFERENCE
Practice & Policy

Virtual consultation for actinic keratosis

Sukhjit Dhariwal, Tushar Hari, Kamal Kaur, Chamandeep Thind, Alison Bedlow, Bruce C Gee and Simon Tso
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (4): bjgpopen20X101126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101126
Sukhjit Dhariwal
1 Specialist Registrar Dermatology, Jephson Dermatology Centre, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tushar Hari
2 Medical Student, The University of Buckingham Medical School, Buckingham, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kamal Kaur
3 GP, Horseley Health Surgery and Tandon Medical Centre, Tipton, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chamandeep Thind
4 Consultant Dermatologist, Jephson Dermatology Centre, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alison Bedlow
5 Consultant Dermatologist, Jephson Dermatology Centre, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruce C Gee
6 Consultant Dermatologist and Lead Skin Cancer Clinician, Jephson Dermatology Centre, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simon Tso
4 Consultant Dermatologist, Jephson Dermatology Centre, South Warwickshire NHS Foundation Trust, Warwick, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: simontso@doctors.org.uk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading
  • Dermatology
  • Hospital referrals
  • Keratosis, Actinic
  • Primary health care
  • Secondary care
  • General practitioners
  • General practice
  • Remote consultation

Introduction

Actinic keratoses (AK) are keratotic lesions presenting on chronically ultraviolet-exposed skin. The rate of malignant progression of a single AK to squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) remains uncertain, with reports ranging from 0.025%–20%.1,2 Patients receiving long-term immunosuppressive medications are at higher risk of developing AK.3 The estimated prevalence of AK is 19%–24% of individuals aged >60 years in the UK.3 Research suggests between 25%–70% of AK may spontaneously regress in a 1–4 year period.3 A Dutch qualitative study highlighted that some primary care clinicians’ principal approach to managing AK was treatment with cryosurgery, or referral to secondary care with patient-driven follow-up care.4 This article aims to inform GPs on the management of AK based on the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) guidelines, the authors’ opinions on effective virtual consultations on AK, and when to refer patients to secondary care.

Clinical presentation of actinic keratosis

AK are often asymptomatic but can be sore or itchy. The presentation of AK is classified into three grades according to the BAD.3 Grade 1 (mild) AK are minimally scaly patches, grade 2 (moderate) are moderately scaly patches, and grade 3 (severe) are hyperkeratotic lesions.3 Confluent areas of AK (field changes) signifies extensive actinic damage.3 International guidelines have classified four different patient groups for treatment: patients with single AK lesions (1–5 AK per field or body region), patients with multiple AK lesions (≥6 AK lesions on one body region or field), patients with field cancerisation (≥6 AK lesions in one body region or field), and patients with concomitant immunosuppression.5

Management approach to actinic keratoses

The BAD guideline indicates that treatment for AK ‘ is not universally required on the basis of preventing progression into squamous cell carcinoma ’.3 In our practice, some patients with asymptomatic grade 1 and 2 AK had made an informed decision to self-monitor the lesions. In this situation, we recommended the use of keratolytic emollients, and provided an AK patient information leaflet, sun protection advice, and safety net advice on when they should seek medical attention. Regular use of sunscreen can reduce the development of AK.6

The indications, treatment regimes, possible complications, and success rates of prescription only-topical therapies and other treatments available are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Meta-analysis of relative efficacy of treatments for AK of the face or scalp showed photodynamic therapy (PDT) is more likely to achieve total clearance from AK followed by 5-flurouracil 0.5% cream, imiquimod 5% cream for 4 weeks, cryotherapy, and diclofenac 3% gel (5-flurouracil 5% cream was excluded from the meta-analysis).7 The choice of treatment depends on patient preference, the burden of the treatment, body site, patient comorbidities, side effects, whether field treatment is required, maximum size of treatment field per treatment cycle, treatment costs, duration of treatment, and the clinician’s experience. We recommend clinicians familiarise themselves with their area prescribing committee’s policy in relation to the costs of treatment, treatment regimes, treatment availability, and treatment pathways, as this may vary in different settings in different countries.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1. Prescription only-topical therapies for actinic keratosisa3
View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2. Other treatments for actinic keratosis3

The treatments listed in Table 1 are expected to cause varying degrees of skin inflammation (typically diclofenac 3% gel causes less skin inflammation than 5-fluorouracil, which causes less than imiquimod) and the residual inflammatory response could take up to 4 weeks (or longer, especially on lower legs) after stopping treatment to fully resolve. Exaggerated response from diclofenac 3% gel could be due to allergic contact dermatitis. If patients could not tolerate the extent of expected inflammatory response from these prescription only-topical therapies, then the treatment should be witheld and the use of topical corticosteroids such as clobetasone butyrate and emollients may be used to hasten the recovery. Patients with genuine concerns about topical therapies causing significant inflammation near delicate body sites (eyes, mouth, and areas of skin erosion), who declined other management options, may be advised to use the therapies more cautiously with a reduced frequency regime (for example, half the frequency or half the duration of treatment) on an off-license basis. In our experience, this is less effective in clearing AK as compared to the licensed regimes and readers should note that this is expert advice only, with no clinical trial evidence to support this practice. Patients should be given an information leaflet with images of possible post-treatment inflammatory responses in order to address patient expectations and anxiety related to inflammation. Topical 5-fluorouracil is toxic to pets and patients should be warned not to let their pets ingest the treatment through licking the patient’s skin.8

Virtual consultations

Virtual consultations have benefits but also risks9 as clinicians cannot palpate the skin to assess for potential invasion, risking misdiagnosis of a skin cancer. In primary care it may be appropriate to offer an initial face-to-face assessment for accurate risk assessment, diagnosis, and discussion of treatment options with patients presenting with AK. Virtual consultation could then be employed for subsequent clinician-led or patient-led follow-up to discuss treatment outcome and management of expected side effects from treatments.

Virtual consultations should ideally be supplemented with good quality photographs — taken by patients, carers, or professionals under good lighting, clearly showing the anatomical location (far view) and close up views of the skin lesion site next to a ruler — which should be sent to a clinician in advance of a virtual consultation. Photographs taken at regular time intervals could be useful to demonstrate the evolution of the lesion before, during, and after treatments. Clinicians must not rely on patients to palpate around the lesion to tell a clinician whether the underlying skin is indurated. AK is an epidermal lesion, thus full resolution of an AK means the patient should report the treatment site returning to normal skin texture without residual scaling. However, some degree of pigmentary skin change and scarring following treatments may occur, especially following cryosurgery treatment. Topical treatments (Table 1) can all be used by patients at home with help from family members wearing protective gloves to apply treatments if needed. Patients should be educated on AK by explaining what they should expect during and after the treatment, and what warning signs to look out for. They should be provided with patient information leaflets and be aware of the importance of wearing sun protection. Clinicians should always organise for the patient to be assessed face-to-face if they are in any doubt about the diagnosis or whether AK have fully cleared.

Referral to secondary care

We encourage referral to secondary care if there is diagnostic uncertainty, treatment resistant AK, or patients with grade 3 AK to exclude a SCC. Organ transplant patients on long term immunosuppressive treatments with lesions due to actinic damage can be referred to secondary care for long-term skin cancer surveillance. Patients with widespread actinic damage could benefit from risk assessment, patient education, and field treatment in secondary care. We wish to highlight that PDT (Figure 1) is a treatment performed in secondary care capable of treating a field size of 16 × 6 cm (conventional PDT) or the whole scalp (daylight PDT). Multiple conventional PDT machines can be used at the same treatment session to treat multiple body sites.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1. Conventional photodynamic therapy. Image shows how conventional photodynamic therapy is performed on a simulated patient. *denotes the lesion site. 1a) The lesion site is marked with a 1cm peripheral margin followed by descaling of the treatment zone with a blade and 1b) the application of a photosensitising agent built up to 1mm thickness which is left on for a minimum of 3 hours under occlusion with a dressing. 1c) The treatment zone should fluoresce pink when examined under a Woods lamp. 1d) A conventional PDT machine is stationed between 5–8cm away from the treatment zone site shining a light (at 37 joules/cm²) at the treatment zone for approximately 7 minutes.

Conclusion

We are of the opinion that patients with grade 1 and 2 AK can be managed effectively in primary care, and patients with AK that is challenging to manage can be referred onwards for secondary care assessment.

Notes

Funding

There are no funders to report for this article.

Ethical approval

N/A

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Tracey Williamson, Carol Jones, and Jenna Pardy for their assistance with the conventional photodynamic therapy photographs, and the reviewers for their constructive feedback on this manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  • Received May 14, 2020.
  • Accepted June 16, 2020.
  • Copyright © 2020, The Authors

This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Marks R,
    2. Rennie G,
    3. Selwood TS
    (1988) Malignant transformation of solar keratoses to squamous cell carcinoma. Lancet 1(8589):795–797, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(88)91658-3, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2895318.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Uhlenhake EE
    (2013) Optimal treatment of actinic keratoses. Clin Interv Aging 8:29–35, doi:10.2147/CIA.S31930, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23345970.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. de Berker D,
    2. McGregor JM,
    3. Mohd Mustapa MF,
    4. et al.
    (2017) British Association of Dermatologists' guidelines for the care of patients with actinic keratosis 2017. Br J Dermatol 176(1):20–43, doi:10.1111/bjd.15107, pmid:28098380.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Noels EC,
    2. Lugtenberg M,
    3. van Egmond S,
    4. et al.
    (2019) Insight into the management of actinic keratosis: a qualitative interview study among general practitioners and dermatologists. Br J Dermatol 181(1):96–104, doi:10.1111/bjd.17818, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30801664.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Werner RN,
    2. Jacobs A,
    3. Rosumeck S,
    4. et al.
    (2015) Methods and Results Report - Evidence and consensus-based (S3) Guidelines for the Treatment of Actinic Keratosis -International League of Dermatological Societies in cooperation with the European Dermatology Forum. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 29(11):e1–e66, doi:10.1111/jdv.13179, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26350885.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Mancebo SE,
    2. Hu JY,
    3. Wang SQ
    (2014) Sunscreens: a review of health benefits, regulations, and controversies. Dermatol Clin 32(3):427–438, doi:10.1016/j.det.2014.03.011, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24891063, x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Vegter S,
    2. Tolley K
    (2014) A network meta-analysis of the relative efficacy of treatments for actinic keratosis of the face or scalp in Europe. PLoS One 9(6), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0096829, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24892649. e96829.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Khoo AA,
    2. Mulgrew S,
    3. Norton S
    (2018) A dog's life: an unfamiliar and lethal side effect of topical 5-fluorouracil. Clin Exp Dermatol 43(6), doi:10.1111/ced.13537, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29888812. 732.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Chada BV
    (2017) Virtual consultations in general practice: embracing innovation, carefully. Br J Gen Pract 67(659):264, doi:10.3399/bjgp17X691121, pmid:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28546401.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 4, Issue 4
October 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Virtual consultation for actinic keratosis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Virtual consultation for actinic keratosis
Sukhjit Dhariwal, Tushar Hari, Kamal Kaur, Chamandeep Thind, Alison Bedlow, Bruce C Gee, Simon Tso
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (4): bjgpopen20X101126. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101126

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Virtual consultation for actinic keratosis
Sukhjit Dhariwal, Tushar Hari, Kamal Kaur, Chamandeep Thind, Alison Bedlow, Bruce C Gee, Simon Tso
BJGP Open 2020; 4 (4): bjgpopen20X101126. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen20X101126
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Introduction
    • Clinical presentation of actinic keratosis
    • Management approach to actinic keratoses
    • Virtual consultations
    • Referral to secondary care
    • Conclusion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • Dermatology
  • hospital referrals
  • Keratosis, Actinic
  • primary health care
  • secondary care
  • general practitioners
  • general practice
  • Remote consultation

More in this TOC Section

  • Telehealth and primary care: a special collection from BJGP Open
  • Reconsidering the Levesque framework: a social work perspective for healthcare professionals
  • The impact of remote consultations on brief conversations in general practice
Show more Practice & Policy

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

@BJGPOpen's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2023 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795