Background Data on prevalence and factors influencing psychological burden in pigmentary disorders are scarce. Objective To determine the point prevalence of anxiety disorder, depression and somatoform disorder in patients with melasma, vitiligo and acquired dermal macular hyperpigmentation (ADMH). Methods A prospective cross‐sectional study involving 100 patients each with melasma, ADMH and vitiligo with lesions on exposed body parts was conducted in the pigmentary clinic of a tertiary care referral hospital from June 2015 to December 2017. Dermatology life quality index, PRIME‐MD Patient Health Questionnaire, Patient Health Questionnaire‐9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder‐7 and Patient Health Questionnaire‐15 were used for assessment of quality of life, psychiatric comorbidities, depression, general anxiety disorder and somatoform disorders, respectively, and correlated with age, gender, occupation, marital status, severity and progression of the disease. Results The prevalence of anxiety disorder in patients with melasma, vitiligo and ADMH was 11.6%, 21% and 18.7%, respectively. Depression was seen in 12.8%, 27% and 24.1% patients with melasma, vitiligo and ADMH, respectively. Somatoform disorder was more common in vitiligo (17.9%) as compared to ADMH (14.3%) and melasma (8.1%). There were positive correlations between the severity of disease and the point prevalence of anxiety and depression in all disorders. Conclusion A high point prevalence of anxiety, depression and somatoform disorders was observed with pigmentary diseases, especially vitiligo and ADMH. The prevalence of anxiety and depression correlated with the disease severity and activity. Future research involving comparison with the general healthy population is required for a more affirmative conclusion.

No abstract

Linked article: This article is commentary on by M. Sławińska et al., pp. e35–e36 in this issue. To view this article visit https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.15155

Background Dermal pigmentation area and severity score (DPASI) is a recently proposed scoring system for acquired dermal macular hyperpigmentation (ADMH). Objective To determine the reliability and validity of DPASI. Methods After standardized training, three researchers independently rated 55 patients with ADMH on two consecutive days within 1 week, to determine intra‐rater and inter‐rater reliability. Validation was performed by comparing DPASI with the physician global assessment score. Results Test–retest reliability of individual raters tested by Pearson's r showed good correlation for all three raters (r = 0.984, P < 0.0001; r = 0.983, P < 0.000 and r = 0.970, P < 0.0001). Inter‐rater agreement computed by intra‐class correlation coefficient also showed good correlation (ICC = 0.997, P < 0.0001). Internal consistency as measured by Cronbach's alpha was 0.997. The score faired well in face and content validity (I‐CVI of 0.87). On usability assessment, the scale had a median score of 4 on a scale from 1 to 5. The meantime taken to score the patients were 307.2 ± 83, 308.9 ± 84.4, 350.15 ± 91.8 s by three observers, respectively. Conclusion The DPASI is a reliable measure of ADMH severity. The use of dermoscopy decreases inter and intra‐observer variation resulting in a more objective score.

Lichen planus pigmentosus (LPP) is a rare disease characterized by persistent and asymptomatic slate-grey pigmentation, which mostly affects patients with skin types IV-VI. The face and neck are the most commonly involved sites, followed by the trunk and extremities. LPP is believed to spare the palms, soles and nails. In this report, we describe palmoplantar involvement in 10 (4.65%, 10/215) patients with LPP, and compare its clinicodemographic features with those of classic LPP. LPP lesions on the palms and soles present as asymptomatic, well-circumscribed, hyperpigmented, brown-black patches without any history of prior lichen planus lesions. They are mostly observed in young patients with rapidly spreading active disease, who often require systemic treatment to control the disease activity. Strikingly, palmoplantar involvement is frequently associated with other atypical LPP variants. It is important to identify palmoplantar involvement in LPP, as it has a different clinical course and associations compared with classic LPP.