2010Photodermatology Photoimmunology & PhotomedicineRequires access

Minimal erythema dose and minimal melanogenesis dose relate better to objectively measured skin type than to Fitzpatricks skin type

Hans Christian Wulf, Peter A. Philipsen, Mette H. Ravnbak

Open publisher page 33 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Fitzpatrick skin type (FST I-IV) is a subjective expression of ultraviolet (UV) sensitivity based on erythema and tanning reactivity after a single exposure. Pigment protection factor (PPF) is an objective measurement of skin sensitivity in all skin types after a single exposure. METHODS: The aim was to compare FST and PPF with clinically determined minimal erythema dose (MED) and minimal melanogenesis dose (MMD) in 84 persons with skin types I-V both after single and multiple exposures (one, four, five, six, or 12) to buttock and back skin. RESULTS: FST was better correlated to MED than to MMD, and FST correlated better to constitutive than to facultative pigmented areas after multiple exposures rather than to a single exposure. PPF was generally much better correlated to MED and MMD than FST especially after a single exposure and multiple exposures with steady-state pigmentation. Multiple regression analyses showed that MED was the only significant, or most important determinator, of both FST and PPF. The correlation coefficient was highly significant for PPF (r² =82). CONCLUSIONS: PPF is a better predictor of the individual UV sensitivity (linear relation) than FST (only 4 grades) and PPF can substitute FST.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Fitzpatrick skin type (FST I-IV) is a subjective expression of ultraviolet (UV) sensitivity based on erythema and tanning reactivity after a single exposure. Pigment protection factor (PPF) is an objective measurement of skin sensitivity in all skin types after a single exposure. METHODS: The aim was to compare FST and PPF with clinically determined minimal erythema dose (MED) and minimal melanogenesis dose (MMD) in 84 persons with skin types I-V both after single and multiple exposures (one, four, five, six, or 12) to buttock and back skin. RESULTS: FST was better correlated to MED than to MMD, and FST correlated better to constitutive than to facultative pigmented areas after multiple exposures rather than to a single exposure. PPF was generally much better correlated to MED and MMD than FST especially after a single exposure and multiple exposures with steady-state pigmentation. Multiple regression analyses showed that MED was the only significant, or most important determinator, of both FST and PPF. The correlation coefficient was highly significant for PPF (r² =82). CONCLUSIONS: PPF is a better predictor of the individual UV sensitivity (linear relation) than FST (only 4 grades) and PPF can substitute FST.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 33 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Fitzpatrick skin type (FST I-IV) is a subjective expression of ultraviolet (UV) sensitivity based on erythema and tanning reactivity after a single exposure. Pigment protection factor (PPF) is an objective measurement of skin sensitivity in all skin types after a single exposure. METHODS: The aim was to compare FST and PPF with clinically determined minimal erythema dose (MED) and minimal melanogenesis dose (MMD) in 84 persons with skin types I-V both after single and multiple exposures (one, four, five, six, or 12) to buttock and back skin. RESULTS: FST was better correlated to MED than to MMD, and FST correlated better to constitutive than to facultative pigmented areas after multiple exposures rather than to a single exposure. PPF was generally much better correlated to MED and MMD than FST especially after a single exposure and multiple exposures with steady-state pigmentation. Multiple regression analyses showed that MED was the only significant, or most important determinator, of both FST and PPF. The correlation coefficient was highly significant for PPF (r² =82). CONCLUSIONS: PPF is a better predictor of the individual UV sensitivity (linear relation) than FST (only 4 grades) and PPF can substitute FST.

Key concepts: Skin type, Erythema, Dermatology, Sensitive skin, Medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Minimal erythema dose and minimal melanogenesis dose relate better to objectively measured skin type than to Fitzpatricks skin type — Research Paper | ScholarLens