Conventional sunscreen application does not lead to sufficient body coverage

Jovanović, Zorica; Schornstein, Th.; Sutor, A. H.; Neufang, Gitta; Hagens, Ralf

doi:10.1111/ics.12413

Cited by 21 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main reason for under‐performance of sunscreen products in‐use is mis‐use by many consumers. For example, sunscreens are not always applied at the correct dosage, are often not applied homogeneously and re‐application is often not performed as recommended .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti‐inflammatory / anti‐oxidant activity of ingredients of sunscreen products? Implications for SPF

Kolbe

Pissavini

Tricaud

et al. 2019

Intern J of Cosmetic Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe Sun Protection Factor (SPF) of sunscreen products is derived from testing in vivo their ability to prevent erythema (“sunburn”). Recently, certain articles have raised concerns that sunscreen products may actively suppress erythema via anti‐inflammatory / anti‐oxidant (AI/AO) activity. These articles reason that this may result in a higher labelled SPF value than that provided by the efficacy of the UVR filters alone, giving consumers a “false sense of security”. On the other hand, since inflammatory processes are known to play a role in the mechanisms of photodamage / skin cancer induction and propagation, AI/AO activity may provide valuable incremental photoprotective benefit (provided that there is no interference with visible erythema). The objective of these studies, therefore, was to investigate the potential of AI/AO ingredients to suppress UVR‐induced erythemal response in human skin, in vivo.Methods In vivo studies with SPF30 sunscreen formulations containing a variety of AI/AO ingredients were performed according to the International Standard ISO24444:2010 method. While ISO24444:2010 requires assessment of erythema at 20 ± 4h post‐irradiation, an additional assessment at 5 h post‐irradiation was also used to determine potential delay in erythema development.ResultsNone of the formulations, containing a variety of AI/AO ingredients, influenced SPF determination in comparison to the vehicle formulation.ConclusionOur in vivo results demonstrate that commonly‐used AI/AO ingredients, at concentrations typically used in sunscreen products, neither influence SPF value nor delay erythemal response, i.e., the measured SPF reflects the true photoprotective capacity of the product.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti‐inflammatory / anti‐oxidant activity of ingredients of sunscreen products? Implications for SPF

Kolbe

Pissavini

Tricaud

et al. 2019

Intern J of Cosmetic Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the actual UVPEs were unknown, because there were several different reports about the relationship between the in vivo SPF and applied amount . In some behavioral studies, conventional UV camera or fluorescent ingredients in specific sunscreens were used for the visualization and quantification of the applied sunscreen . Compared with conventional imaging techniques, MUPRIS does not provide the total applied amount of sunscreen, but it can precisely provide the actual and real‐time UVPE within a few minutes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…36,37 In some behavioral studies, conventional UV camera or fluorescent ingredients in specific sunscreens were used for the visualization and quantification of the applied sunscreen. 13,24,30 Compared with conventional imaging techniques, MUPRIS does not provide the total applied amount of sunscreen, but it can precisely provide the actual and real-time UVPE within a few minutes. Therefore, MUPRIS may allow larger and in-depth investigations in this research field.…”

Section: Application For Behavioral Investigationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of a UV camera is an alternative and strong qualitative tool for determining the effectiveness of sunscreen, because it readily allows noninvasive evaluation over time and in a variety of settings. 24,25 In a UV image, regions where sunscreen had been applied are significantly darker than bare skin because sunscreen absorbs UV light. Unfortunately, the conventional UV cameras used for the qualitative evaluation of the UVPE have the major technical drawback of not being able to distinguish between a low-UVPE region and specular light.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of the multispectral UV polarization reflectance imaging system (MUPRIS) for in situ monitoring of the UV protection efficacy of sunscreen on human skin

Nishino

Haryu

Kinoshita

et al. 2019

Skin Research and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProtection of the human skin from ultraviolet (UV) damage is one of the main issues in dermatology and cosmetology. The UV protection efficacy (UVPE) of the sunscreen film is decreased by sweat, sebum, and friction during the day. However, the technical relationship between the UVPE evaluated in a laboratory and the actual protection in daily use has not been clarified, because the UVPE measurement method in real‐life setting has not been established. This study aimed to develop a novel UVPE evaluation system that allows in situ monitoring of the UVPE in real‐life activities.MethodsThe multispectral UV polarization reflectance imaging system (MUPRIS) and a UVPE estimation algorithm were developed. The diffuse reflectance spectra were measured for a total of 48 sunscreen materials that were applied on 59 subjects. The UVPEs estimated from the diffuse reflectance spectra were compared with the in vivo SPFs. Finally, the UVPE before and after a marine leisure activity was evaluated using the MUPRIS as the practical use test.ResultsCompared with the conventional UV camera, the MUPRIS could visualize the applied sunscreen more clearly and showed good UVPE estimation accuracy (correlation coefficient for in vivo SPF, 0.82). In the practical use test, the degradation of the UVPE during a marine leisure activity was quantitatively monitored and was validated by the actual occurrence of sunburn.ConclusionsA novel in situ UVPE monitoring tool had been successfully developed. It can strongly support the development of innovative sunscreen products that can perfectly protect customers against UV irradiation in real‐life situation.

show abstract

Characteristics and Skin Cancer Risk Behaviors of Adult Sunless Tanners in the United States

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and melanoma skin cancers are increasing rapidly in the United States likely because of increased UV light exposure. Sunless tanning is a safe alternative to achieve tanned skin that might help reduce skin cancer incidence by deterring risky behaviors. However, limited data exist on the characteristics and associated skin cancer risk behaviors of sunless tanners in the United States. OBJECTIVE To assess the demographic characteristics and skin cancer risk behaviors of sunless tanners among adults in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This secondary analysis of a cross-sectional study used data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey, a population-based survey of the US noninstitutionalized civilian population. Participants included 27 353 men and women 18 years or older. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES Participant demographics and skin cancer risk behaviors, including indoor tanning, skin cancer screening, sunburn, and sun protection behaviors. RESULTS Of the 27 353 adults (representative of more than 198 million US adults; mean [SE] age, 46.0 [0.2] years) studied, 6.4% (SE, 0.2%) reported sunless tanning. Factors associated with sunless tanning included being young, female, non-Hispanic white, college educated, nonobese, and sun sensitive, living in the western United States, and having a family history of skin cancer. Sunless tanners were more likely to report indoor tanning (adjusted prevalence odds ratio [aPOR], 3.77; 95% CI, 3.19-4.43; P < .001), recent sunburn (aPOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.31-1.83; P < .001), use of sunscreen (β = 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.28; P < .001), and having had a full-body skin examination (aPOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.51-2.08; P < .001) but less likely to seek shade (β = −0.12; 95% CI, −0.19 to −0.04; P = .001) or use protective clothing when outdoors (long pants: β = −0.18; 95% CI, −0.26 to −0.11; P < .001; long sleeves: β = −0.10; 95% CI, −0.18 to −0.03; P = .01). Among indoor tanners, sunless tanners compared with those who did not sunless tan reported increased frequency of indoor tanning (mean [SE], 19.2 [1.9] vs 14.9 [1.2] sessions in the past 12 months; P = .04) but no differences in other skin cancer risk behaviors.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study suggests that sunless tanning is associated with risky skin cancer-related behaviors. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess whether sunless tanning changes UV exposure behaviors to better determine whether sunless tanning represents an effective public health strategy to reduce rates of skin cancer in the United States.

show abstract

Conventional sunscreen application does not lead to sufficient body coverage

Cited by 21 publications

References 19 publications

Anti‐inflammatory / anti‐oxidant activity of ingredients of sunscreen products? Implications for SPF

Anti‐inflammatory / anti‐oxidant activity of ingredients of sunscreen products? Implications for SPF

Development of the multispectral UV polarization reflectance imaging system (MUPRIS) for in situ monitoring of the UV protection efficacy of sunscreen on human skin

Characteristics and Skin Cancer Risk Behaviors of Adult Sunless Tanners in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About