Diurnal Variations in Solar Ultraviolet Radiation at Typical Anatomical Sites

Hu, Liwen; Gao, Qian; Xu, Wei; Wang, Yang; Gong, Hui; Dong, Guang‐Hui; Li, Jing-Hai; Liu, Yang

doi:10.1016/s0895-3988(10)60058-x

Cited by 19 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence also shows that UV exposure could be associated with uveal melanoma [5]. As a result, solar UV radiation has been increasingly measured in the past decades [6][7][8][9][10][11]. Hu et al [11] discovered the bimodal distribution of the diurnal ocular UV radiation (UVR), and Gao et al [12] later confirmed this phenomenon and found that both diurnal ocular UVA or UVB radiation are bimodal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The enhancement of biological ocular UV radiation on beaches compared to the radiation on grass

Liu

Wang

Gao

et al. 2014

Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The enhancement of biological ocular UV radiation on beaches compared to the radiation on grass

Liu

Wang

Gao

et al. 2014

Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Ocular tissues are protected by the upper brow bone, eyebrows, and lashes from some solar zenith angles, particularly when the sun is directly overhead. 19, 20 Although there is some seasonal variation, 21 evidence supports that the time of day most significant to ocular tissues occurs when the sun is lower in the sky and is thus bimodal, occurring approximately three to four hours before and after the period of most intense overhead ambient UV. 22, 23 One limitation of the present study is that we did not assess the time of day sun exposure occurred; future studies will be designed to further investigate the potential significance of this variable to conjunctival ultraviolet autofluorescence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal Effect on Ocular Sun Exposure and Conjunctival UV Autofluorescence

Haworth¹,

Chandler

2017

Optom Vis Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate feasibility and repeatability of measures for ocular sun exposure and conjunctival ultraviolet autofluorescence (UVAF), and to test for relationships between the outcomes. Methods Fifty volunteers were seen for 2 visits 14±2 days apart. Ocular sun exposure was estimated over a two-week time period using questionnaires that quantified time outdoors and ocular protection habits. Conjunctival UVAF was imaged using a Nikon D7000 camera system equipped with appropriate flash and filter system; image analysis was done using ImageJ software. Repeatability estimates were made using Bland-Altman plots with mean differences and 95% limits of agreement calculated. Non-normally distributed data was transformed by either log10 or square root methods. Linear regression was conducted to evaluate relationships between measures. Results Mean (±SD) values for ocular sun exposure and conjunctival UVAF were 8.86 (±11.97) hours and 9.15 (±9.47) mm2, respectively. Repeatability was found to be acceptable for both ocular sun exposure and conjunctival UVAF. Univariate linear regression showed outdoor occupation to be a predictor of higher ocular sun exposure; outdoor occupation and winter season of collection both predicted higher total UVAF. Furthermore, increased portion of day spent outdoors while working was associated with increased total conjunctival UVAF. Conclusions We demonstrate feasibility and repeatability of estimating ocular sun exposure using a previously unreported method and for conjunctival UVAF in a group of subjects residing in Ohio. Seasonal temperature variation may have influenced time outdoors and ultimately calculation of ocular sun exposure. As winter season of collection and outdoor occupation both predicted higher total UVAF, our data suggests that ocular sun exposure is associated with conjunctival UVAF and possibly, that UVAF remains for at least several months following sun exposure.

show abstract

“…A few studies have attempted to measure personal UV exposures during normal daily activities of specific anatomical sites, using human subjects wearing instruments (such as UVR-sensitive polysulfone film, UV-Biometer model 501, electronic personal dosimeter (X-2000), polysulphone dosimeters and et al) located at specific anatomical sites (for example, shoulders, heads, chest, back, neck, face, and arm) [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. Studies have also been conducted using models to simulate specific human anatomical sites for UV irradiance exposure [32,33,34]. On the other hand, human outdoor activities typically occur randomly and are orientated at different directions toward the sun, while workers are instructed to work at more predictable rotation angle ranges relative to the position of the sun in the sky.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Assessment of Face Skin Exposure to UV Irradiance from Different Rotation Angle Ranges

Wang

Gao

Deng³

et al. 2017

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultraviolet (UV) is one of the environmental pathogenic factors causing skin damage. Aiming to assess the risk of face skin exposure to UV irradiance from different rotation angles, a rotating model was used to monitor the exposure of the skin on the face to UV irradiance, with skin damage action spectra used to determine the biologically effective UV irradiance (UVBEskin) and UVBEskin radiant exposure (HBEskin) causing skin damage. The results indicate that the UVBEskin is directly influenced by variations in rotation angles. A significant decrease of approximately 52.70% and 52.10% in UVBEskin was found when the cheek and nose measurement sites was rotated from 0° to 90°, while a decrease of approximately 62.70% was shown when the forehead measurement sites was rotated from an angle of 0° to 108°. When HBEskin was compared to the exposure limits (ELs; 30 J·m−2), the maximum relative risk ratios (RR) for cheek, nose, and forehead were found to be approximately 2.01, 2.40, and 2.90, respectively, which were all measured at a rotation angle of 0°. The maximal increase in the percentage of the average HBEskin for rotation angles of 60°, 120°, 180°, and 360° facing the sun to ELs were found to be approximately 62.10%, 52.72%, 43.43%, and 26.27% for the cheek; approximately 130.61%, 109.68%, 86.43%, and 50.06% for the nose; and approximately 178.61%, 159.19%, 134.38%, and 83.41% for the forehead, respectively.

show abstract

Diurnal Variations in Solar Ultraviolet Radiation at Typical Anatomical Sites

Cited by 19 publications

References 51 publications

The enhancement of biological ocular UV radiation on beaches compared to the radiation on grass

The enhancement of biological ocular UV radiation on beaches compared to the radiation on grass

Seasonal Effect on Ocular Sun Exposure and Conjunctival UV Autofluorescence

Risk Assessment of Face Skin Exposure to UV Irradiance from Different Rotation Angle Ranges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About