Jump to content

PubMed RSS Feed - -Insurance coverage gap for treatment of melasma compared to rosacea: it pays to be light


rss

Recommended Posts

Br J Dermatol. 2021 Jul 13. doi: 10.1111/bjd.20641. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

Treatments for many common dermatologic diagnoses are denied insurance coverage due to their arbitrary cosmetic classification. Melasma is one such diagnosis often considered cosmetic by payers, and since it is commonly identified in darker-skinned individuals, its cosmetic classification creates an economic barrier for patients of color. Although dermatologists have previously described insurance coverage gaps for conditions typically seen in patients of color, this coverage gap has never been quantified.1 Thus, we investigated the rate of insurance coverage for first-line topical treatments for rosacea versus melasma. Rosacea and melasma share a number of key features - both are common, chronic, dermatological conditions that are exacerbated by sun exposure, are primarily treated topically, and cause measurably decreased quality of life in affected patients.2,3 Rosacea, however, is often diagnosed in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types I-II, with 91.8% of rosacea diagnoses seen in white patients, while melasma is predominantly diagnosed in patients with Fitzpatrick skin types III-V.4-6.

PMID:34254297 | DOI:10.1111/bjd.20641

{url} = URL to article

What is the Fitzpatrick Scale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...