Itch is a highly prevalent and multidimensional symptom. We aimed to analyze the association between itch and mental health in dermatological patients. This multicenter study is observational and cross-sectional and was conducted in dermatological clinics across 13 European countries. A total of 3,530 patients and 1,094 healthy controls were included. Patients were examined clinically. Outcome measures were itch (presence, chronicity, and intensity), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, EQ-5D visual analogue scale, sociodemographics, suicidal ideation, and stress (negative life events and economic difficulties). Ethical approval was obtained. Results showed significant association between the presence of itch in patients and clinical depression (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-2.02), suicidal ideation (odds ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.60), and economic difficulties (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.50). The mean score of reported generic health status assessed by the EQ-5D visual analogue scale was 65.9 (standard deviation = 20.1) in patients with itch, compared with 74.7 (standard deviation = 18.0) in patients without itch (P < 0.001) and 74.9 (standard deviation = 15.7) in controls with itch compared with 82.9 (standard deviation = 15.6) in controls without itch (P < 0.001). Itch contributes substantially to the psychological disease burden in dermatological patients, and the management of patients should include access to multidisciplinary care.

Background Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is a common psychiatric disorder associated with high costs for healthcare systems as patients may repeatedly ask for different, often not effective interventions. BDD symptoms are more prevalent in patients with dermatological conditions than the general population, but there are no large sample studies comparing the prevalence of BDD symptoms between patients with dermatological conditions and healthy skin controls. Objectives To compare the prevalence of BDD symptoms between patients with different dermatological conditions and healthy skin controls and to describe sociodemographic, physical and psychological factors associated with BDD symptoms to identify patients who may have a particularly high chance of having this condition. Methods This observational cross-sectional, comparative multi-centre study included 8295 participants: 5487 consecutive patients with different skin diseases (56% female) recruited among dermatological out-patients at 22 clinics in 17 European countries and 2808 healthy skin controls (66% female). All patients were examined by a dermatologist. BDD symptoms were assessed by the Dysmorphic Concern Questionnaire (DCQ). Sociodemographic data, information on psychological factors and physical conditions were collected. Each patient was given a dermatological diagnosis according to ICD-10 by a dermatologist. Results The participation rate of invited dermatological patients was 82.4% on average across all centres. BDD symptoms were five times more prevalent in patients with dermatological conditions than in healthy skin controls (10.5% vs. 2.1%). Patients with hyperhidrosis, alopecia and vitiligo had a more than eleven-fold increased chance (adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) > 11) of having BDD symptoms compared to healthy skin controls, and patients with atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, acne, hidradenitis suppurativa, prurigo and bullous diseases had a more than six-fold increased chance (adjusted OR > 6) of having BDD symptoms. Using a logistic regression model, BDD symptoms were significantly related to lower age, female sex, higher psychological stress and feelings of stigmatisation. Conclusions This study reveals that clinical BDD symptoms are significantly associated with common dermatological diseases. As such symptoms are associated with higher levels of psychological distress and multiple unhelpful consultations, general practitioners and dermatologists should consider BDD and refer patients when identified to an appropriate service for BDD screening and management.

Background: Chronic pruritus (CP) is a subjective symptom, and it is necessary to assess its intensity with validated patient‐reported outcome tools in order to allow determination of the treatment course.Objectives: So far, the itch intensity scales were validated in small cohorts and in single languages. Here, we report the validation of the numerical rating scale, the verbal rating scale and the visual analogue scale for the worst and average pruritus intensity in the last 24h in several languages across Europe and across different pruritic dermatoses.Methods: After professional translation, the intensity scales were digitized for use as a tablet computer application. Validation was performed in clinics for Dermatology in Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Russia, Spain, Switzerland and Turkey.Results: A total of 547 patients with contact dermatitis, chronic nodular prurigo, psoriasis vulgaris, lichen planus or cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma were included. The intensity scales showed a high level of reproducibility and inter‐correlations with each other. The correlation with the Dermatology Life Quality Index was weak to strong in nearly all countries and dermatoses with the exception of France and patients with chronic nodular prurigo, for which no statistically significant correlations were found.Conclusions: The numerical rating scale, the verbal rating scale und the visual analogue scales are valid instruments with good reproducibility and internal consistency in German (Germany, Austria, Switzerland), French, Italian, Polish, Russian, Spanish and Turkish for different pruritic dermatoses. VAS worst was the best reproducible and consistent measuring instrument in all countries.

Is missing (Short communication)...

Background: Itch as the most common symptom in dermatology has been shown to be related to psychological factors such as stress, anxiety and depression. Moreover, associations were found between perceived stigmatization and itch. However, studies investigating the differences between patients with dermatoses with and without itch regarding perceived stress, stigmatization, anxiety and depression are missing. Therefore, one of the aims of the second study of the European Society for Dermatology and Psychiatry (ESDaP study II) was to investigate these relationships in a large cohort of patients with different itchy dermatoses.Results: 3399 patients with 14 different itchy dermatoses were recruited at 22 centres in 17 European countries. They filled in questionnaires to assess perceived stigmatization, stress, signs of clinically relevant anxiety or depression, itch‐related quality of life, the overall health status, itch duration, frequency and intensity. The most significant association between the severity of itching and the perception of stress was observed among individuals with rosacea (correlation coefficient r = 0.314). Similarly, the strongest links between itch intensity and experiences of stigmatization, anxiety, and depression were found in patients with seborrheic dermatitis (correlation coefficients r = 0.317, r = 0.356, and r = 0.400, respectively). Utilizing a stepwise linear regression analysis, it was determined that within the entire patient cohort, 9.3% of the variation in itch intensity could be accounted for by factors including gender, levels of anxiety, depression, and perceived stigmatization. Females and individuals with elevated anxiety, depression, and perceived stigmatization scores reported more pronounced itch intensities compared to those with contrary attributes.Conclusion: This study underscores the connection between experiencing itch and its intensity and the psychological strain it places on individuals. Consequently, psychological interventions should encompass both addressing the itch itself and the interconnected psychological factors. In specific cases, it becomes imperative for dermatologists to direct individuals towards suitable healthcare resources to undergo further psychological assessment.

Psychodermatology is a subspecialty of dermatology that is of increasing interest to dermatologists and patients. The case for the provision of at least regional psychodermatology services across Europe is robust. Psychodermatology services have been shown to have better, quicker and more cost‐efficient clinical outcomes for patients with psychodermatological conditions. Despite this, psychodermatology services are not uniformly available across Europe. In fact many countries have yet to establish dedicated psychodermatology services. In other countries psychodermatology services are in development. Even in countries where psychodermatolgy units have been established, the services are not available across the whole country. This is especially true for the provision of paediatric psychodermatology services. Also whilst most states across Europe are keen to develop psychodermatology services, the rate at which this development is being implemented is very slow. Our paper maps the current provision of psychodermatology services across Europe and indicates that there is still very much more work to be done in order to develop the comprehensive psychodermatology services across Europe, which are so crucial for our patients.