Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Phototype reproducibility and relation to objectively measured skin sensitivity is best when burn and tan reactivity to sun are answered separately

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Photoprotection by sunscreen depends on time spent on application

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Factors associated with cessation of sunbed use among Danish women

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Short-term chemical pretreatment cannot replace curettage in photodynamic therapy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Is the thin layer of methyl aminolevulinate used during photodynamic therapy sufficient?

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. The background and philosophy behind daylight photodynamic therapy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Organ transplant recipients express enhanced skin autofluorescence and pigmentation at skin cancer sites

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Photodynamic therapy of necrobiosis lipoidica using methyl aminolevulinate: A retrospective follow-up study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Protoporphyrin IX formation after application of methyl aminolevulinate on the face and scalp with and without prior curettage

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Skin phototype questionnaires usually ask similar questions, but they differ in how the answers can be given. There is either one combined answer, which includes both tendency to burn and ability to tan, or 2 separate answers about burn and tan, respectively. We tested the reproducibility of different questionnaires and their relation to objectively measured skin phototype.

METHOD: A total of 149 participants completed 3 skin phototype questionnaires distributed twice with median 3 months interval: (i) a Fitzpatrick questionnaire (FST-q) with combined answers about tendency to burn and ability to tan, (ii) a detailed questionnaire (Detail-q) with separate answers to 2 detailed questions about burn and tan and (iii) a short questionnaire (Short-q) with separate answers to 2 simplified questions about burn and tan. Objective skin phototype measurements were performed by measuring pigment protection factor (PPF) by spectrophotometry.

RESULTS: Good-to-very-good reproducibility for all phototype questionnaires was shown by weighted kappa (κw ) values: κw = .65 for the FST-q with combined (burn and tan) answers; κw = .64 for tendency to burn and κw = .68 for ability to tan for the Detail-q; and κw = .72 for tendency to burn and κw = .85 for ability to tan for the Short-q. PPF at all measurement sites was best predicted by the Detail-q (highest r2 = 0.285 on the outer arm), followed by the Short-q and by the FST-q.

CONCLUSION: The detailed questionnaire with separate answers to 2 detailed questions about tendency to burn and ability to tan has good reproducibility, correlates best with objective skin measurements and is therefore the recommended method for determining skin phototype.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPhotodermatology, Photoimmunology & Photomedicine
Vol/bind34
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)366-373
Antal sider8
ISSN0905-4383
DOI
StatusUdgivet - nov. 2018

ID: 56141274