Fitzpatrick Skin Type Self Reporting Versus Provider Reporting: A Single-center, Survey-based Study.

Abstract

Objective: The authors sought to compare the results in Fitzpatrick Skin Type (FST) reporting among providers, trainees, and patients. They discussed the implications of discordance in FST reporting among these groups.

Methods: This survey-based study was offered to all adult patients (18 years or older), dermatology residents, and dermatology faculty providers at University of Oklahoma Dermatology Clinic in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Deidentified information from the patient survey, provider-assigned FST, and provider credentials were consolidated, and data was analyzed by a biostatistician.

Results: The provider-assigned FST was more accurate than the patient's own estimation of their own ability to tan versus burn. The patient's race played an important factor in a discrepancy between provider and patient described FST. Additionally, provider years in practice increased the odds of any discrepancy existing.

Limitations: This study was conducted at one clinic location encompassing only the immediate geographic population.

Conclusion: Despite being the most used skin tone classification system in dermatology, the FST system has many limitations. The classification system needs to be reevaluated or replaced with methods that more accurately, appropriately, and reliably describe skin tones and skin photo reactivity. Education is necessary for current trainees to avoid erroneous use of classifications such as the FST.