No abstract

The background of this article is that assessment and quantification of skin color is important to health care; color is one indicator of overall health and is linked to oxygenation, tissue perfusion, nutritional status, and injury. The purpose is to describe how skin color varies across racial/ethnic groups so that the information can be applied to clinical practice. The method used is cross-sectional, descriptive design (n = 257). We recorded self-defined race/ethnicity and used a spectrophotometer to measure skin color at two anatomic sites. Skin color variables included L* (light/dark), a* (red/green), and b* (yellow/blue). As regards results, we found significant differences in L*, a*, and b* values by site and race/ethnicity in White, Asian, and Biracial participants. L*: F(3, 233) = 139.04, p < .01 and F(3, 233) = 118.47, p < .01. Black participants had significantly lower mean L* values and wider ranges of L*, a*, and b* as compared with other groups. In regard to application, these findings suggest that clinicians and researchers should plan and provide care based on skin color, rather than race/ethnicity.

Skin is the primary interface between health care providers and patients and is assessed clinically to predict physiological stability or instability. The biomechanical properties of human skin, most notably elasticity and viscoelasticity, are critical to its protective function. In this article, the authors describe the physiological basis for skin elasticity and viscoelasticity. The authors discuss the role of viscoelasticity in nursing science and consider avenues for scientific exploration of the skin’s biomechanical properties, including applications in pressure ulcer research, injury, and healing. They also discuss the Cutometer® as one option for measurement of viscoelasticity in clinical and bench research protocols.

The Fitzpatrick Skin Phototypes (FSP) were developed to classify skin color and response to ultraviolet radiation. FSP are used clinically to assess risk for sunburn and skin cancer. Our aim was to determine the criterion-related validity of self-reported FSP when compared with skin color and sunburn history, controlling for age, race/ ethnicity, and seasonality/geography. We performed a secondary analysis of data (N=466) from an observational study. The racial/ethnic composition of the sample was 45% White/White Hispanic (WWH), 40% Black/Black Hispanic (BBH), and 15% Other Identities. Outcome measures were self-reported FSP and sunburn history, as well as physiological measures of skin color (L* lightness/darkness, a* redness/greenness, b*yellowness/blueness). Correlation between FSP and L* was -.77 (95% CI -.81, -.73; P<.001). Although 60% of the variance in FSP was accounted for by L* values for the entire sample, only 5% of the variance was accounted for among BBH participants (r=-.23), and up to 30% for WWH/Other Identity participants (r=-.48 and -.52). Mul­tiple regression analysis indicated L* and b* values, sunburn history, and race/ethnicity, but not geography/seasonality or a* values significantly and collectively accounted for 72% of the variance in FSP. While the criterion validity of FSP was established by the strong relationship between L* values and FSP for the entire sample, when exam­ined at the level of individual racial/ethnic subgroups, criterion validity of FSP was not demonstrated. When self-reported FSP are used for clinical skin assessment and sun cancer screening, they provide a restricted range of options for people with darker skin that does not capture variations in their skin color. Inaccuracy of clinical data may lead to unequal treatment or inadequate cancer risk assessment. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(3):505-512. doi:10.18865/ed.29.3.505

While intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual violence (SV) are highly associated with injury, the healthcare and legal significance of these injuries is controversial. Purpose: Herein we propose to explore the significance of injury in IPV and SV and examine the current status of injury classification systems from the perspectives of the healthcare and criminal justice systems. We will review current injury classification systems and suggest a typology of injury that could be tested empirically. Findings: Within the published literature, we found that no commonly-accepted injury typology exists. While nuanced and controversial issues surround the role of injury detection in the sexual assault forensic examination, enough evidence exists to support the continued pursuance of a scientific approach to injury classification. We propose an injury typology that is measureable, is applicable to the healthcare setting and criminal justice system, and allows us to use uses a matrix approach that includes a severity score, anatomic location, and injury type. We suggest a typology that might be used for further empirical testing on the validity and reliability of IPV and SV injury data. Conclusion: We recommend that the community of scientists concerned about IPV and SV develop a more rigorous injury classification system that will improve the quality of forensic evidence proffered and decisions made throughout the criminal justice process.

No abstract

Medical-legal-social science research has documented that nongenital and/or anogenital injuries play a significant role throughout the criminal justice system from victims reporting to judges determining the length of a sentence. What remains an open question is whether the documentation of anogenital injury influences women's willingness to engage in the criminal justice system. A sample of women age 21 years and older residing in an urban area were asked about willingness to report to police, file charges, and work with the courts to prosecute after rape. Questions were framed with a qualifying statement about the forensic examination being able to detect injury related to forced sexual intercourse. Results show that women had a high willingness to act if the examination could detect anogenital injury and women with and without a history of forced sexual intercourse had significant differences in their responses to these questions. Implications for health care, criminal justice system, and future research are discussed.

Scholars in nursing science have long espoused the concept of health equity without specifically using the term or dialoguing about the social determinants of health and social justice. In this paper, we describe the development, implementation, and evaluation of a doctoral and post- doctoral seminar collective entitled Health Equity: Conceptual, Linguistic, Methodological and Ethical Issues. The course enabled scholars-in-training to consider the construct and its nuances and frame a personal philosophy of health equity. We offer an example of how a group of emerging scholars can engage in the important, but difficult discourse related to health equity. The collective provided a forum for debate, intellectual growth, and increased insight for students and faculty. We posit that the lessons learned by all participants have the potential to enrich doctoral and post-doctoral scientific training in nursing science and may serve as a model for other research training programs in the health sciences.