Many recent articles on epiluminescence microscopy (ELM) discuss the value of ELM in diagnosing pigmented lesions. Dermatologists have been urged to incorporate this technique in their daily practice. Most studies on the value of ELM have been performed by persons with special expertise. I am aware of only one article addressing the issue of training; it appeared in the March 1995 issue of the Archives, and is entitled "Epiluminescence Microscopy: A Useful Tool for the Diagnosis of Pigmented Skin Lesions for Formally Trained Dermatologists."1 In their article, Binder et al demonstrated a significant difference in the accuracy of ELM evaluations between practicing dermatologists and the group of expert researchers.
Has anyone addressed the significant differences between the instruments used by investigators and those available to the ordinary practitioner? Most studies on ELM have used binocular surface microscopes (operating microscopes) with excellent binocular optics. The instruments available to the dermatologists
Epstein E. Instrumentation for Epiluminescence Microscopy: The Gap Between Research and Practice. Arch Dermatol. 1996;132(1):91–92. doi:10.1001/archderm.1996.03890250105022
Monkeypox Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.