A panelist discusses that the intranasal epinephrine device causes only mild, expected adverse effects such as nasal discomfort and headache, avoids injection-related risks, demonstrates rapid symptom improvement in pediatric food challenge studies, and offers practical advantages such as higher heat tolerance for storage and a longer shelf life compared with traditional autoinjectors.

A panelist discusses a newly approved intranasal epinephrine device for treating anaphylaxis in both children and adults, highlighting its needle-free delivery using a nasal spray with an absorption enhancer that ensures effective, safe drug uptake comparable to injections—even under nasal congestion—offering a promising alternative to traditional epinephrine autoinjectors.

A panelist discusses how intranasal epinephrine represents a significant advance over traditional autoinjectors by eliminating needles, addressing user anxiety and real-world barriers, and potentially improving adherence and timely treatment in anaphylaxis emergencies.

A panelist discusses how barriers such as cost, fear of injections, and lack of confidence delay epinephrine use in anaphylaxis and explains how intranasal delivery and updated guidelines may reduce hesitation and improve timely, effective treatment through better education and accessibility.

A panelist discusses the critical importance of early epinephrine administration in anaphylaxis for preventing severe outcomes, explaining its multireceptor action and lifesaving potential, while highlighting how intranasal delivery could enhance timely use and empower caregivers with faster, more accessible treatment options.

A panelist discusses how intranasal epinephrine could transform anaphylaxis management by improving accessibility, reducing treatment delays, and addressing underuse of epinephrine—especially in pediatric and high-risk populations—while emphasizing the need for better education and more user-friendly interventions to improve outcomes.

Panelists discuss billing and coding procedures for skin scanning devices, focusing on the use of unlisted Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) 99 codes with proper documentation and modifiers, the importance of clear communication with billing teams, available educational resources to aid primary care settings, and operational considerations including scope-of-practice variations for device use among clinical staff.

Panelists discuss an interactive case session emphasizing the nuanced evaluation of suspicious skin lesions, highlighting tools such as the DermaSensor for risk scoring, the ugly duckling concept, and the importance of combining clinical judgment with technology to guide biopsy decisions and patient follow-up across diverse skin types.

Panelists discuss that decisions to forgo biopsy often weigh patient risk and lesion characteristics with noninvasive tools offering valuable reassurance; while familiarity with artificial intelligence (AI) aids varies, these technologies—used judiciously and alongside clinical expertise—can boost diagnostic confidence, though limitations and integration challenges remain.

Panelists discuss that successful adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) skin cancer detection tools requires proven effectiveness, easy integration into clinical workflows, appropriate reimbursement, and use as supportive aids that complement—not replace—clinical judgment.