EXAMINATION OF THE SKIN, HAIR, NAILS, AND MUCOUS MEMBRANES
The skin functions as a sensory organ; as an organ of
metabolism that has synthesizing, excretory, and absorptive functions; as a
protective barrier against the external environment; and as an important factor
in temperature regulation. The clinical examination of the skin is partly an
appraisal of these particular functions. In addition, however, the skin is
synergistic with internal organ systems, and therefore, it reflects pathologic
processes that are either primary elsewhere or shared in common with other
tissues. The history of medicine suggests that diseases initially characterized
as solely cutaneous (e.g., lupus erythematosus, dermatitis herpetiformis, and
urticaria pigmentosa) have often subsequently been found to involve several
systems.
In as much as visual appreciation of skin lesions is the
sine qua non of dermatologic diagnosis, the examiner's eye is undoubtedly the
most important instrument at his or her disposal. Yet the standardization of
this instrument is a subject that receives scant attention, even though there
are surprising variations in physicians' reports of what has been seen.
Furthermore, variability persists at every step of the diagnostic process, from
description to differential diagnosis. The chances for correct recognition
improve, of course, as the examiner gains familiarity with the various
disorders of the skin. Even with experience, however, the greatest difficulty
in diagnosis is often because of a failure to notice pertinent details from the
available evidence.
Feinstein has challenged the tendency to favor laboratory
tests that give numerical values as opposed to clinical observations. He wrote
that clinicians try to be scientific in the use of inanimate objects but not in
the use of their own sensory organs and brain. They often believe that their
own human equipment is a hindrance instead of an advantage, an apology rather
than an incentive for science in clinical work. Feinstein emphasized the need
for more attention to sick people and the human methods of evaluating them, not
to inanimate technology. Furthermore, the ability to arrive at a diagnosis
through the history and physical examination is probably the most ancient,
perhaps defining, and often—from an intellectual point of view—most satisfying
attribute of being a physician. Physical diagnosis is an art, but no less a
science because of it, and nowhere is the skill of physical examination more
crucial to accurate diagnosis than it is in dermatology.
The examination of the skin should be made in a well-lighted
room with natural light, if possible, or a “daylight” type of lamp. When
feasible, the patient should be gowned, and examined completely and
systematically in sections or quadrants. Articles of clothing are hindrances
during the examination and may even be responsible for the inadvertent
concealment of large areas of the skin.
The examination should commence with a general assessment of
the patient as a whole—a “low-power” scan of the skin surface, during which
rapid stock is taken of the skin, nails, and mucous membranes. The survey
should include an appreciation of the color, moisture, the turgor, odor and the
texture of the skin. Clothing may give clues to the cause of a suspected
contact dermatitis or parasitic infestation (e.g., pediculosis).