Performing dermatologic procedures in infants, children, and teenagers presents many unique challenges. There may be unique diagnoses, different instruments, differences in skin biology, or different approaches to pain management and anesthesia; the inclusion of a third party (caregivers) in decision processes; or a need to assess maturity level or to optimize outcomes over the patient’s lifetime. The field of pediatric procedural dermatology is broad. This article reviews some of the more common procedures performed by pediatric dermatologists and some of the more common ethical and quality-of-life (QOL) considerations one might face in procedural pediatric dermatology. (The textbook Procedural Pediatric Dermatology1 offers a thorough discussion of this topic.)
Quality of Life
More often than not, procedures are performed in pediatric dermatology to improve QOL rather than to prevent morbidity or mortality. In the case of many self-limited conditions, such as ingrown nails or pyogenic granulomas, it is clear that intervention will improve the patient’s QOL. In the case of warts and molluscum contagiosum, emotional, social, and cultural considerations play a large role in determining whether an intervention will improve QOL. Finally, some conditions, such as genodermatoses, giant congenital melanocytic nevi, and large vascular malformations, may be associated with additional systemic symptoms and may not have good treatment options for cure. In these cases, procedural interventions will result in a mixture of positive and negative QOL outcomes that can occur at the same time.
Bemmels et al2 published a qualitative study that provides a good foundation for understanding the positive and negative effects of procedural interventions on children and teenagers. In their study, children and teenagers who underwent reconstructive surgery for craniofacial differences noted improved self-esteem and reduced stigmatization. However, they also experienced negative outcomes, including an addiction to attaining a perfect surgical face, missing school for treatments, difficulty adjusting to an evolving appearance, anxiety related to not knowing when treatments will end, and experiencing stigma related to undergoing surgery.2 Thus, a comprehensive plan for the management of children who need ongoing procedures should include some level of psychosocial support. Two good references on supporting young patients with visible differences include CBT for Appearance Anxiety: Psychosocial Interventions for Anxiety Due to Visible Difference3 and Reaching Teens: Strength-Based, Trauma-Sensitive, Resilience-Building Communication Strategies Rooted in Positive Youth Development.4
Ethics
Ethical decisions in pediatric procedural dermatology differ from adult dermatology in 3 major ways: (1) the involvement of a third party (ie, parents or legal guardians), (2) the need to assess the maturity of the patient, and (3) the need to know local laws in the jurisdiction in which care is being provided. Ethical dilemmas occur when the desires of the child, parents/guardians, and dermatologist are not in alignment. In these cases, it is important to be prepared with a moral or ethical framework to guide decision-making when conflicts occur. Two great resources are the best interest standard5 and the publication entitled, “Informed Consent in Decision-making in Pediatric Practice,” from the American Academy of Pediatrics.6
In pediatrics, it often is better to conceptualize medical decision-making as a combination of informed permission and assent of the patient rather than informed consent. Informed permission describes how a parent or surrogate makes decisions for the child or adolescent and is similar to informed consent. A parent’s informed permission may be in conflict with a child’s wishes, but it is assumed that the parent is acting in the best interest of the child. Assent of the patient is the process of obtaining a minor’s agreement to undergo an intervention even though he/she may lack legal authority or decision-making capacity to provide standard informed consent. It is important to respect the child’s right to assent to interventions to the extent that their maturity level permits to develop trust with the dermatologist and medical encounters in general.
These differences emphasize an active process in which the patient, caregiver, and physician are all involved in the health care process and allow for increasing inclusion of the child as is developmentally appropriate. In the end, however, parents have the legal authority to give or withhold permission for a procedure.7 When this conflicts with a child’s dissent, the dermatologist will need to objectively explore the reasons for the conflict and decide if a procedure is not in the child’s best interests. If a mutual understanding cannot be reached between the dermatologist and parents, obtaining a second opinion is a good option.8