Community pharmacy-based interventions for primary and secondary skin cancer prevention among individuals accessing pharmacy services: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate community pharmacy-based interventions for primary and secondary skin cancer prevention among individuals accessing pharmacy services.

METHODS

This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidance and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD420261300767). Searches were conducted in five electronic databases, with the final search completed on 21 March 2026, and were complemented by Google Scholar and reference list screening. Studies published in English or Spanish between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2025 were eligible if they evaluated community pharmacist-led or community pharmacy-based activities related to photoprotection, skin cancer prevention, early detection, referral, or implementation. Study selection, data extraction, and methodological appraisal were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Findings were synthesized narratively.

KEY FINDINGS: Eleven studies published between 2008 and 2025 were included. Interventions addressed sun-safety education, photoprotection counselling, sunscreen use, medication-related photosensitivity counselling, awareness of skin cancer warning signs, risk assessment, lesion assessment, mole scanning, teledermatology-supported evaluation, and referral pathways. Overall, studies suggested improvements in knowledge, awareness, preventive intentions, short-term photoprotective actions, feasibility, and acceptability. However, the evidence showed methodological limitations, including limited comparator use, reliance on self-reported outcomes, incomplete follow-up, and inconsistent diagnostic confirmation.

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmacy represents a promising setting for primary and secondary skin cancer prevention. However, current evidence remains heterogeneous and largely observational. More robust controlled and implementation studies are needed to evaluate sustained behaviour change, diagnostic accuracy, referral outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and long-term clinical impact.