The Case for Clinical Skincare Support in Non-Dermatology Practices

Skin health is already part of non-dermatology medicine.

Between 21% and 36% of primary care visits involve at least one skin complaint, and in the majority of those encounters, skin is the primary concern. At the same time, new-patient dermatology wait times now average over 30 days, with significantly longer delays in many rural areas.

The result is a structural mismatch: common skin concerns tied to medical treatment are frequently referred out, even when they could be addressed effectively with timely, evidence-based guidance.

Skincare Is a Continuity Variable

Most medical care is delivered episodically. Skin care operates daily.

Most practices address skincare reactively:

• Brief product suggestions

• General handouts

• “Monitor and refer if it worsens”

These approaches shift daily decision-making to patients without sufficient support. When patients leave a visit without structured skincare guidance, they fill the gap themselves—often with inconsistent, conflicting, or inappropriate products. The downstream effects are predictable: irritation, non-adherence, portal messages, avoidable escalations, and outcomes that appear unstable despite sound medical management.

This is not a specialty issue. It is a system issue.

Evidence Supports Shared-Care Skincare Models

Research consistently shows that algorithm-based skincare protocols implemented in non-dermatology settings improve access and efficiency without compromising care quality. Stepwise acne management in primary care, for example, has been shown to reduce dermatology referrals by nearly 50–70%, lower per-patient costs, and shorten wait times.

Importantly, these models do not eliminate referrals—they refine them. Dermatologists retain focus on complex, treatment-resistant, and high-risk conditions, while routine and supportive care is handled earlier and more consistently.

Supportive Skincare Is Already Within Scope

The interventions themselves are conservative and evidence-based: gentle cleansers, barrier-repair moisturizers, appropriate photoprotection, and condition-specific support. These strategies are well supported across multiple clinical contexts—from oncology-related cutaneous adverse events to inflammatory conditions and barrier disruption associated with hormonal or metabolic disease.

Consider the oncologist managing treatment tolerance, the endocrinologist addressing hormonal fluctuations, or the primary care physician managing chronic disease. Skin changes in these patients are not incidental—they are expected manifestations of the underlying condition.

Addressing them does not require dermatologic specialization. It requires proactive structures.

Defining Boundaries Strengthens Care

Clinical skincare support works when scope is explicit. Non-dermatology practices should address first-line, supportive concerns and escalate appropriately when conditions are severe, atypical, or unresponsive.

When ownership is defined:

• Providers preserve clinical time

• Staff manage fewer preventable follow-ups

• Patients receive consistent guidance

• Referrals become more appropriate

This work already exists in most practices. Formalizing it reduces friction rather than adding complexity.

A Systems-Level Opportunity

Clinical skincare support in non-dermatology practices is not about replacing dermatology. It is about aligning care delivery with how patients actually experience health—across conditions, treatments, and daily life.

Patients are already making skincare decisions. The question is whether those decisions are informed and coordinated with their medical care.

In non-dermatology settings, skincare is not cosmetic. It is often directly tied to treatment tolerance, recovery, adherence, and clinical outcomes. When addressed proactively and within defined boundaries, skincare functions as supportive care—not specialty substitution.

Treating skincare as a structured clinical support function, rather than an afterthought, strengthens care delivery without adding provider burden. By closing the gap between encounter-based oversight and daily skin care decisions, practices improve access, efficiency, and outcomes at the same time.

This is not an expansion of scope. It is an optimization of care—and a systems improvement grounded in evidence.