Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on January 11, 2005
Family Practice 2005 22(1):62-70; doi:10.1093/fampra/cmh715
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A systematic review of the evidence for ‘myths and misconceptions’ in acne management: diet, face-washing and sunlight
a Discipline of General Practice, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, b Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, and c Department of Dermatology, Royal Newcastle Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
Email: Parker.Magin{at}newcastle.edu.au
Received 2 June 2004; Accepted 27 September 2004.
Magin P, Pond D, Smith W and Watson A. A systematic review of the evidence for ‘myths and misconceptions’ in acne management: diet, face-washing and sunlight. Family Practice 2004; 22: 62–70.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMethodsDeclarationReferences |
|---|
Background. Lay perceptions that diet, hygiene and sunlight exposure are strongly associated with acne causation and exacerbation are common but at variance with the consensus of current dermatological opinion.
Objectives. The objective of this study was to carry out a review of the literature to assess the evidence for diet, face-washing and sunlight exposure in acne management.
Methods. Original studies were identified by searches of the Medline, EMBASE, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL, Cochrane, and DARE databases. Methodological information was extracted from identified articles but, given the paucity of high quality studies found, no studies were excluded from the review on methodological grounds.
Results. Given the prevalence of lay perceptions, and the confidence of dermatological opinion in rebutting these perceptions as myths and misconceptions, surprisingly little evidence exists for the efficacy or lack of efficacy of dietary factors, face-washing and sunlight exposure in the management of acne. Much of the available evidence has methodological limitations.
Conclusions. Based on the present state of evidence, clinicians cannot be didactic in their recommendations regarding diet, hygiene and face-washing, and sunlight to patients with acne. Advice should be individualized, and both clinician and patient cognizant of its limitations.
Keywords. Acne, diet, hygiene, sunlight.
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsDeclarationReferences |
|---|
This article reviews the evidence base for common lay and medical beliefs regarding acne. A 2001 article1 advocated ‘debunking myths about acne’ and, among ‘myths’ nominated for debunking, were those related to diet (chocolate and fatty foods), hygiene, face cleansing and sun-exposure.
These perceived myths and misconceptions about acne causation, exacerbating factors and treatment efficacies are common, and not just among patients. In an analysis of examination answers of final year medical students at Melbourne University, Green and Sinclair2 found that 67% of students identified stress, 10% identified smoking and alcohol, and 25% identified poor facial hygiene3 as exacerbating factors in acne. Dietary factors (especially chocolate, oily or fatty foods and high sugar-content foods) were nominated by 41% as exacerbating acne. The corollary of these beliefs about aetiology were some of the treatment recommendations of the final year students—cleaners and washes, antiseptics and medicated soaps, and improved facial hygiene and diet.
In these matters the students responses reflect popular attitudes and opinions, but they are at variance with a consensus of dermatological opinion that diet, stress and uncleanliness are unrelated to acne pathogenesis and that skin cleansing and dietary manipulation are ineffective in acne treatment.4–21
Similarly, in a 2001 Australian study of obstetric ward doctors and nurses,22 12% of doctors and 20% of nurses believed sun exposure to be therapeutic for acne. There has been a lay and traditional dermatological opinion that sunlight exposure was beneficial in acne and that this caused acne to improve in summer and worsen in winter,3,4,19,23–28 though this is now generally thought to be more likely not to be the case.6,17,19,20
|
Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsDeclarationReferences |
|---|
A literature search was performed in July 2003 using the databases Medline, EMBASE, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine), CINAHL, Cochrane, and DARE. Search terms used were acne vulgaris with combinations of myths, misconceptions, diet, chocolate, sugar, hygiene, wash, cleanse, sun, light, and ultraviolet. The search was confined to English language articles. Reference lists of identified articles were examined for further relevant studies. There were no pre-specified quality criteria for study inclusion. Methodological information was extracted to assist in interpretation of results. Many studies had methodological shortcomings—for example, small sample sizes with no power considerations, lack of control subjects, lack of blinding, or unclear or unstated statistical methods. Given the paucity of high quality studies found and the seemingly considerable effect some studies of limited methodological quality have had on current opinion and practice, no studies were excluded from the review on methodological grounds. The methodological limitations of studies, and the resultant implications for interpretation of findings, are noted.
Results
Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and AMED searches identified 221, 171, 28 and 1 references, respectively. Examination of these citations and abstracts produced eleven trials of dietary, washing or ultraviolet-light exposure treatment modalities. Hand-searching of references from papers obtained in the search located a further 14 studies.
The role of dietary factors (Table 1). There are, perhaps surprisingly, few studies that examine the role of diet in acne. Three studies have specifically examined the role of chocolate.
|
Grant and Anderson29 and Anderson30 performed trials of chocolate, milk and roasted nuts in university students and found no effect on acne, but the trials were small, uncontrolled, had very short follow-up, and inadequate statistical analysis. Fulton et al. in a single-blind placebo-controlled cross-over trial in American hospital acne clinic attendees and male prisoners31 found no effect of chocolate on acne (or on sebum production or composition). A small study32 of patients with acne (16 subjects and 13 matched controls) found no difference in sugar consumption between the two groups—though patients with seborrhoeic dermatitis had higher levels of sugar consumption.
A study of 2720 British soldiers found no difference in weight between soldiers, aged 15–19, with or without acne. Soldiers aged 20–40 with acne however were significantly heavier (5.6 kg) than soldiers aged 20–40 without acne.33 This study has been quoted in the context of a possible link between diet and acne,7 but the evidence of this study for such a link would appear tenuous.
Recently, a reappraisal of the current thinking regarding diet and acne has been proposed following a cross-sectional study of acne in native, non-westernised New Guinean and Paraguayan populations.34 This study showed no cases of acne in either of these populations, and this was contrasted with prevalence of acne in western populations. It is proposed that western diets, with characteristically high glycaemic indexes, lead to hyperinsulinaemia and a resulting cascade of endocrine consequences (increased androgens, increased insulin-like growth-factor 1, altered retinoid signaling pathways) which mediate acne pathogenesis.34,35
A further recent study has demonstrated a correlation of worsening ‘diet quality’ (during a pre-examination period in university students) and exacerbation of acne.36 The main factor examined in this study was the effect of examination stress on acne severity, and the dietary variable measured was self-assessed diet quality (on a scale 1–4) rather than a validated objective measure of dietary components.
The role of dirt, hygiene, cleanliness and washing (Table 2). Soap has been advocated in the treatment of acne since the 19th century37 and Solomon and Shalita, in a 1996 review of the use of detergents, soaps, cleansers, foaming solutions, moisturisers and washes in acne, make detailed recommendations regarding skin cleansing in acne.38 But they cite very little evidence for their recommendations.
|
Improvements in acne have been noted in a small (ten subjects) uncontrolled study of a medicated face wash,39 a further uncontrolled, and incompletely reported, study of face washing,40 a study in which an abrasive was used in addition to a medicated wash in some subjects but had no non-wash controls,41 an open uncontrolled and incompletely reported study of a cleansing bar and the ‘Buf-puf’ abrasive device,42 and in studies in which medicated soap or acidic syndet bar was compared with unmedicated soap but in which, again, no non-wash comparison was studied.43,44 The large placebo effect in placebo-controlled acne therapy trials—19–56% in a sample of seven placebo controlled trials of tetracyclines in acne45,46—must be considered in interpreting these results.
Stoughton and Leyden,47 however, reported randomized controlled studies of a 4% chlorhexidine gluconate skin cleanser preparation with controls using, in one study, 5% benzoyl peroxide and, in another two studies, the vehicle employed in the chlorhexidine preparation. There was no significant difference in acne lesion counts at 8 and 12 weeks in the chlorhexidine/benzoyl peroxide study. The combined data of the two chlorhexidine/vehicle studies showed significantly less acne lesions at 8 and 12 weeks in the chlorhexidine-using subjects than in the unmedicated vehicle-using controls.
A povidone-iodine cleanser was reported to improve acne in randomized controlled trials,48 but statistical reporting was deficient. Swinyer et al. studied the effect on acne of three treatment regimens. Each treatment regimen included a different cleansing/washing modality. However each regimen also included a different systemic or topical antibiotic combination, so the role of cleansing or washing cannot be adequately assessed in this study.49
The role of sunlight (Table 3). The authors of a Saudi Arabian study which found that new cases of acne at a hospital dermatology clinic increased during the winter months concluded that this was due to the favourable effect of UV-light on acne during the warmer months.28 But they do not present any data on referral procedures and patterns, waiting times or other factors which might confound this observation. Elsewhere, acne has been found to improve in one third of subjects in summer, worsen in another third, and remain the same in the other third—though these results were obtained in a retrospective study26 and are thus prone to recall bias as well as not having controlled for potential confounders such as comedogenicity of sunscreens.
|
It might be thought that studies of the effect of natural sunlight on acne might be inherently problematic methodologically. In this circumstance, inferences drawn from trials of artificial light-sources may be of relevance. Trials of artificial UV-B, UV-A and combined light sources,27 and phototherapy with artificial blue-red, blue, violet, green and full-spectrum lightsources50–53 have been found to improve acne, but methodological concerns—statistical significance or lack of controls or lack of blinding—limit interpretation of these results to varying degrees. While these studies may suggest a possible ameliorating effect of UV-light on acne, a trial of UV-radiation has also found it to enhance the comedogenicity of sebum in the ear skin of rabbits—the best available animal model of human facial skin.54
Discussion
The context of the debate: lay beliefs regarding acne causation.
The question of whether common perceptions and beliefs regarding diet, cleanliness and sunshine prove to be fact or misconception is of considerable importance due to the practical implications of these beliefs for acne management, adverse effects, expense and potential psychological sequelae, and due to their prevalence and consistency across different western cultures. Studies from the United States,55,57 New Zealand,56 Britain,58 Germany,59 Nigeria,60 Saudi Arabia61 and Sweden62 report high prevalence of belief in the causal or therapeutic roles of diet, cleanliness and sunlight in acne.
Diet. Dietary modifications are commonly practised by patients with acne. Though not usually having the potential for adverse nutritional sequelae of dietary restrictions employed in some other conditions, they can nevertheless be burdensome for patients. The evidence for their efficacy or otherwise is not strong. Convincing trials are lacking.
The studies of acne and chocolate of Grant and Anderson29 and Anderson30 have considerable methodological shortcomings. The subjective self-assessed measure of global dietary quality in Chiu et al.'s study36 renders these findings of limited relevance to this review. The trial of Fulton et al.31 was methodologically stronger. But the findings of this study are worthy of closer inspection. Most importantly, the placebo bar was of a similar fat and sugar composition to the study (chocolate) bar. Therefore, while this study might suggest no role for the cocoa content of chocolate bars in acnegenesis, the role of the complete product remains open to question. Furthermore the treatment period for both chocolate and placebo bars was just four weeks. Consideration of the pathogenesis of acne lesions may be relevant. It has been hypothesized that chocolate may exacerbate acne by production of more comedogenic sebum—by increasing blood lipid levels5 or by producing ‘less fluid sebum’63—and thence greater obstruction of pilosebaceous follicles, setting the stage for follicle rupture and secondary inflammatory changes. A further possible mechanism by which acne could be exacerbated is via hyperinsulinaemia and changes in the HPA axis34,35 (see below). Neither of these mechanisms might be expected to produce changes in a short time-frame. Certainly, all efficacious medical treatments of acne take two months or more to produce clinically significant changes.64,65 Given the four week treatment periods and three week wash-out period in the cross-over design, it may be that there was insufficient study duration to observe the relevant changes.
The New Guinea/Paraguay study cited is consistent with the often quoted observations of Schaefer that acne "used to be unknown among Eskimos, but one can see it readily amongst [eskimo] teenagers ... many eskimos themselves blame their pimples on ‘pop, chocolate and candies’."66 Furthermore, a physiological mechanism of causation (initiated by hyperinsulinaemia with subsequent androgen increases) has been proposed. Indirect support for this proposition is to be found in the high rates of acne in the condition polycystic ovary syndrome which is characterised by hyperinsulinaemia and high androgen levels,67 and in studies which have found an association between acne in females and higher levels of androgens.68,69
But comparing the findings of studies in New Guinean and Paraguayan hunter-gathers with rates of acne in Western populations, even when supported by biologically plausible hypotheses of mechanism of causation, does not provide proof of a causal relationship—it is inherently prone to "ecological fallacy"70: the individual diet of the subjects who develop acne is not known and confounders cannot be assessed. As has been commented on,35,71 the obvious alternative explanation of the low prevalence of acne in these non-westernized populations is that of genetic susceptibility to acne.72 But, perhaps, of more immediate practical significance, is the fact that the therapeutic institution of such a non-western diet is unlikely to be acceptable to adolescents with acne. The dietary restrictions which Western adolescents with acne employ in managing their condition are trivial compared to the differences between their diets and those of hunter-gatherers.
Thus, in 2003 there is not yet compelling evidence on which GPs or other clinicians can base advice regarding nutrition in relation to acne.
Facial hygiene and face cleansing. Not only are the facial cleansing regimens of patients with acne often burdensome, they can be expensive. The evidence for the role of a lack of facial hygiene in acne pathogenesis and for face cleansing in its management is mostly of poor quality. Furthermore, face-washing has been proposed as being traumatising, and so exacerbating acne73 and as increasing the skin irritation adverse effects of topical tretinoin and isotretinoin (though not other topical therapies) in acne treatment.49,74,75
Additionally, commonly used soaps and shampoos have been found to be comedogenic when applied to the rabbit ear.76 Even the author of one of the above cited studies concedes face washing for acne "continues to be empirical therapy".40
Sunlight. Convincing direct evidence for a positive effect of sunlight exposure on acne is lacking. Recent findings suggesting various spectrums of artificial light to be efficacious may not be directly generalizable to natural sunlight. Another consideration is that the long-term sequelae of sun exposure for acne therapy may well be an increased risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin malignancy—notwithstanding the intriguing association of acne with decreased melanoma risk.77 Additionally, photosensitivity is an issue with commonly used, efficacious medical treatments of acne—tetracyclines78–80 and isotretinoin.81,82
Evidence from twin studies. Indirect evidence of a lack of a major role for environmental factors including diet and skin hygiene in acne pathogenesis comes from studies of the genetic determinants of acne. Research in this area has found strong evidence, especially from twin studies, for the role of heredity in acne.83 A large twin study of 458 pairs of monozygotic and 1099 pairs of dizygotic female twins in the UK84 was performed to assess the relative contribution of genetic and environmental factors on the liability to acne. The study found that 81% of the variance of the disease was attributable to genetic factors and only 19% to environmental factors. These results contradict the results of an earlier study which found similar rates of acne concordance in monozygotic and dizygotic twins85—but this was a much smaller study (only 20 pairs of twins in each group). A further British case–control study of hospital dermatology adult patients with persistent acne86 found a significantly greater risk of adult acne in relatives of patients than in relatives of controls (odds ratio 3.93), though this may be explained by shared environmental exposures among families.
Thus, the potential for intervention in environmental areas may be limited. The devotion of considerable time, effort and expense on the part of patients in efforts to address purported environmental factors in their condition might be reassessed and be better directed towards optimising medical therapy—management strategies for which strong evidence of efficacy exists.9
Psychological implications. The psychological dimension of this debate should also be considered. A 1976 British Medical Journal editorial, noting the potential for excessive or obsessional face-washing to exacerbate acne, suggested that obsessional washing may be related to the perception that acne was cased by dirt and that it is regarded as "an outward sign of moral defilement".73 An academic dermatologist has observed "most of the dietary manipulations advocated by non-professional advisors seem more calculated to punish rather than to cure, and none are backed up by experimental evidence".13 And Green and Sinclair2 suggest a worrying implication of the linkage of facial hygiene to acne aetiology and treatment—the implication that acne is a consequence of being dirty and that sufferers are unhygienic. A reasonable hypothesis following from this proposition is that such misconceptions may exacerbate the recognized psychological sequelae of acne—especially in the areas of self-esteem, shame and embarrassment.56,58,87–91
Conclusion
The evidence base for current recommendations regarding dietary, face-washing and UV-exposure behavioural modifications in acne management is incomplete at best. Studies have often been of small sample size, uncontrolled, or unblinded.
There are also, perhaps, a number of other factors that may influence recommendations to patients. The potential for sun-exposure to increase risk of skin malignancy must be considered. The anecdotal evidence of patients that certain foodstuffs exacerbate their acne cannot be dismissed out of hand. The cost of medicated washes for acne can be considerable. Methodologically rigorous research is clearly required to address the effect of these exposures on acne.
The inescapable conclusion is that, given our present state of knowledge, clinicians cannot be didactic in their recommendations. Advice should be individualized, and both clinician and patient cognizant of its limitations.
|
Declaration |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsDeclarationReferences |
|---|
Funding: this journal article was written with support from a NHMRC post-graduate medical scholarship and a NSW Primary Health Care Research Bursary.
Ethical approval: n/a.
Conflicts of interest: none.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMethodsDeclarationReferences |
|---|
1 Clearihan L. Acne. Myths and management issues. Aust Fam Phys 2001; 30: 1039–1044.[Medline]
2 Green J, Sinclair RD. Perceptions of acne vulgaris in final year medical student written examination answers. Aust J Dermat 2001; 42: 98–101.
3 Brieva J, McCracken GA, Diamond B. Update and treatment of acne vulgaris. Med Update Psychiatrists 1997; 2: 161–163.[CrossRef]
4 Maddin S. Current concepts in the management of acne vulgaris. Can Med Assoc J 1969; 100: 340–343.[Medline]
5 Fries JH. Chocolate: a review of published reports of allergic and other deleterious effects, real or presumed. Annals of Allergy 1978; 41: 195–207.[ISI][Medline]
6 Kaminester LH. When friends or family ask about acne. J Am Med Assoc 1978; 239: 2171–2172.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
7 Rosenberg EW, Kirk BS. Acne diet reconsidered. Archives of Dermatology 1981; 117: 193–195.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
8 Landow K. Dispelling myths about acne. Postgraduate Medicine 1997; 102: 94–99, 103–104, 110–112.
9 Webster GF. Acne vulgaris. Br Med J 2002; 325: 475–479.
10 Russell JJ. Topical therapy for acne. Am Fam Phys 2000; 61: 357–366.[ISI][Medline]
11 Anonymous. What can I do about pimples. Am Fam Phys 2000; 61:.
12 Rothe MJ, Grant-Kels JM. Clearing up the myths about clear skin. Consultant 1995; 35: 251–252.
13 Marks R. Acne—social impact and health education. J Royal Soc Med 1985; 78 (Suppl 10): 21–24.
14 Michaelsson G. Diet and acne. Nutr Rev 1981; 39: 104–106.[ISI][Medline]
15 Maslansky L, Wein G. Effect of chocolate on acne vulgaris. J Am Med Assoc. 1970; 211: 1856.[Medline]
16 Minkin W, Cohen HJ. Effect of chocolate on acne vulgaris. J Am Med Assoc. 1970; 211: 1856.[Medline]
17 Mancini AJ. Acne vulgaris: a treatment update. Contemp Pedatrics 2000; 17: 122–133.
18 Hannuksela A, Hannuksela M. Soaps and detergents in skin diseases. Clinics in Dermatology 1996; 14: 77–80.[ISI][Medline]
19 Hjorth N. Traditional topical treatment of acne. Acta Dermato-enereologica. Supplementum. 1980; Suppl 89: 53–56.
20 Katsambas A. Nonsense acne therapy. J Eur Acad Derm Venereology 1997; 9 (Suppl 1): S30.
21 Greener M. Acne: the PN role. Practice Nurse 2002; 24: 52–54.
22 Harrison S, Hutton L, Nowak M. An investigation of professional advice advocating therapeutic sun exposure. Aust New Zealand J Pub Health 2002; 26: 108–115.
23 Scheck A. Teens forsake sunscreen, believe rays help acne. Dermatology Times 2000; 21 (September): S34.
24 Wharton JR, Cockerell CJ. The sun: a friend and enemy. Clinics in Dermatology 1998; 16: 415–419.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
25 Abramovitz M. Clearing up those acne myths. Curr Health 2000; 26: 30.
26 Gfesser M, Worret WI. Seasonal variations in the severity of acne vulgaris. Int J Dermat 1996; 35: 116–117.[Medline]
27 Mills OH, Kligman AM. Ultraviolet phototherapy and photochemotherapy of acne vulgaris. Archives of Dermatology 1978; 114: 221–223.[Abstract]
28 Al-Ameer AM, Al-Akloby O. Demographic features and seasonal variations in patients with acne vulgaris in Saudi Arabia: a hospital-based study. Int J Dermat 2002; 41: 870–871.[Medline]
29 Grant JD, Anderson PC. Chocolate and acne: a dissenting view. Missouri Medicine 1965; 62: 459–460.[Medline]
30 Anderson PC. Foods as the cause of acne. Am Fam Phys 1971; 3: 102–103.[ISI][Medline]
31 Fulton JE Jr, Plewig G, Kligman AM. Effect of chocolate on acne vulgaris. J Am Med Assoc 1969; 210: 2071–2074.[CrossRef][Medline]
32 Bett DG, Morland J, Yudkin J. Sugar consumption in acne vulgaris and seborrhoeic dermatitis. Br Med J 1967; 3 (558): 153–155.[ISI][Medline]
33 Bourne S, Jacobs A. Observations on acne, seborrhoea, and obesity. Br Med J 1956: 1268–1270.
34 Cordain L, Lindeberg S, Hurtado M, Hill K, Eaton SB, BrandMiller J. Acne vulgaris: a disease of Western civilization [comment]. Archives of Dermatology 2002; 138: 1584–1590.
35 Thiboutot DM, Strauss JS. Diet and acne revisited [comment]. Archives of Dermatology 2002; 138: 1591–1592.
36 Chiu AC, Chon SY, Kimball AB. The response of skin disease to stress: changes in the severity of acne vulgaris as affected by examination stress. Archives of Dermatology 2003; 139: 897–900.
37 Routh HB, Bhowmik KR, Parish LC, Witkowski JA. Soaps: from the Phoenicians to the 20th century—a historical review. Clinics in Dermatology 1996; 14: 3–6.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
38 Solomon BA, Shalita AR. Effects of detergents on acne. Clinics in Dermatology 1996; 14: 95–99.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
39 Cunliffe WJ, Cotterill JA, Williamson B. The effect of a medicated wash on acne, sebum excretion rate and skin surface lipid composition. Br J Dermat 1972; 86: 311–312.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
40 Hulme NA, Parish LC, Witkowski JA. Skin cleansing as an accompaniment to acne therapy. Int J Dermat 1986; 25: 505.[Medline]
41 Fulghum DD, Catalano PM, Childers RC, Cullen SI, Engel MF. Abrasive cleansing in the management of acne vulgaris. Archives of Dermatology 1982; 118: 658–659.[Abstract]
42 MacKenzie A. Use of Buf-Puf and mild cleansing bar in acne. Cutis 1977; 19: 370–371.[ISI][Medline]
43 Bettley FR. The effect of a medicated wash on acne. Br J Dermat 1972; 87: 292–293.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
44 Korting HC, Ponce-Poschl E, Klovekorn W. The regular use of a soap or an acidic syndet bar on pre-acne. Infection 1995; 23: 89–93.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
45 Crounse RG. The response of acne to placebos and antibiotics. J Am Med Assoc 1965; 193: 906–910.[Medline]
46 Savin RC, Turner MC. Antibiotics and the placebo reaction in acne. J Am Med Assoc 1966; 196: 365–367.[CrossRef][Medline]
47 Stoughton RB, Leyden JJ. Efficacy of 4 percent chlorhexidine gluconate skin cleanser in the treatment of acne vulgaris. Cutis 1987; 39: 551–553.[ISI][Medline]
48 Millikan LE. A double-blind study of Betadine skin cleanser in acne vulgaris. Cutis 1976; 17: 394–398.[Medline]
49 Swinyer LJ, Swinyer TA, Britt MR. Topical agents alone in acne. A blind assessment study. J Am Med Assoc 1980; 243: 1640–1643.[Abstract]
50 Papageorgiou P, Katsambas A, Chu A. Phototherapy with blue (415 nm) and red (660 nm) light in the treatment of acne vulgaris. Br J Dermat 2000; 142: 973–978.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
51 Ammad S, Edwards C, Gonzalez M, Mills CM. The effect of blue light phototherapy on mild to moderate acne. Br J Dermat 2002; 147 (Suppl 62): 95.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
52 Kawada A, Aragane Y, Kameyama H, Sangen Y, Tezuka T. Acne phototherapy with a high-intensity, enhanced, narrow-band, blue light source: an open study and in vitro investigation. J Dermat Sci 2002; 30: 129–135.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
53 Sigurdsson V, Knulst AC, van Weelden H. Phototherapy of acne vulgaris with visible light. Dermat 1997; 194: 256–260.
54 Mills OH, Porte M, Kligman AM. Enhancement of comedogenic substances by ultraviolet radiation. Br J Dermat 1978; 98: 145–150.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
55 Rasmussen JE, Smith SB. Patient concepts and misconceptions about acne. Archives of Dermatology 1983; 119: 570–572.[Abstract]
56 Pearl A, Arroll B, Lello J, Birchall NM. The impact of acne: a study of adolescents' attitudes, perception and knowledge. New Zealand Med J 1998; 111: 269–271.[Medline]
57 Emerson GW, Strauss JS. Acne and acne care. A trend survey. Archives of Dermatology 1972; 105: 407–411.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
58 Smithard A, Glazebrook C, Williams HC. Acne prevalence, knowledge about acne and psychological morbidity in mid-adolescence: a community-based study. Br J Dermat 2001; 145: 274–279.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
59 Niemeier V, Kupfer J, Demmelbauer-Ebner M, Stangier U, Effendy I, Gieler U. Coping with acne vulgaris. Evaluation of the chronic skin disorder questionnaire in patients with acne. Dermatology 1998; 196: 108–115.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
60 Orafidiya LO, Agbani EO, Oyedele AO, Babalola OO, Onayemi O. Preliminary clinical tests on topical preparations of Ocimum gratissimum Linn Leaf essential oil for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Clinical Drugs Under Investigation 2002; 22: 313–319.[CrossRef]
61 Al-Hoqail IA. Knowledge, beliefs and perceptions of youth toward acne vulgaris. Saudi Medical J 2003; 24: 765–768.
62 Berg M. Epidemiological studies of the influence of sunlight on the skin. Photo-Dermatology 1989; 6: 80–84.[ISI][Medline]
63 Mackie BS, Mackie LE. Chocolate and acne. Aust J Dermat 1974; 15: 103–109.
64 Poyner T, Cunliffe B. Commentary: A UK primary care perspective on treating acne[comment]. Br Med J 2002; 325: 475–479.
65 Gollnick H, Cunliffe W, Berson D, Dreno B, Finlay A, Leyden JJ et al. Management of acne: a report from a Global Alliance to Improve Outcomes in Acne. J Am Acad Dermat 2003; 49 (Suppl 1).
66 Schaefer O. When the Eskimo comes to town. Nutrition Today 1971; 6: 8–16.[CrossRef]
67 Lucky AW. Hormonal correlates of acne and hirsutism. Am J Med 1995; 98 (1A): 89S–94S.[CrossRef][Medline]
68 Thiboutot D, Gilliland K, Light J, Lookingbill D. Androgen metabolism in sebaceous glands from subjects with and without acne [comment]. Archives of Dermatology. 1999; 135: 1041–1045.
69 Lucky AW, Biro FM, Simbartl LA, Morrison JA, Sorg NW. Predictors of severity of acne vulgaris in young adolescent girls: results of a five-year longitudinal study [comment]. J Pediatrics 1997; 130: 30–39.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
70 Gordis L. Epidemiology (2nd edn). Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2000.
71 Bershad S. The unwelcome return of the acne diet. Archives of Dermatology 2003; 139: 940–941.
72 Freyre EA, Rebaza RM, Sami DA, Lozada CP. The prevalence of facial acne in Peruvian adolescents and its relation to their ethnicity. J Adolescent Health 1998; 22: 480–484.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
73 Anonymous. Washing away at acne. Br Med J 1976; 2 (6040): 834–835.[Medline]
74 Dunlap FE, Baker MD, Plott RT, Verschoore M. Adapalene 0.1% gel has low skin irritation potential even when applied immediately after washing. Br J Dermat 1998; 139 (Suppl 52): 23–25.[Medline]
75 Millikan LE. Pivotal clinical trials of adapalene in the treatment of acne. J Euro Acad Dermat Venereology 2001; 15 (Suppl 3): 19–22.
76 Mills OH, Kligman AM. Acne detergicans. Archives of Dermatology 1975; 111: 65–68.[Abstract]
77 Beral V, Evans S, Shaw H, Milton G. Cutaneous factors related to the risk of malignant melanoma. Br J Dermat 1983; 109: 165–172.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
78 Vassileva SG, Mateev G, Parish LC. Antimicrobial photosensitive reactions. Archives of Internal Medicine 1998; 158: 1993–2000.
79 Layton AM, Cunliffe WJ. Phototoxic eruptions due to doxycycline—a dose-related phenomenon. Clin Exp Dermat 1993; 18: 425–427.
80 Garner SE, Eady EA, Popescu C, Newton J, Li Wan Po A. Minocycline for acne vulgaris: efficacy and safety (Cochrane Review). Cochrane Library Issue 1, Oxford: Update Software; 2003.
81 Mashford ML, Fischer G, Marks R, Quirk C, Rose A, Sinclair RD et al. Therapeutic Guidelines: Dermatology. Melbourne: Therapeutic Guidelines Limited; 1999.
82 Sams M, Lynch P. Principles and practice of dermatology (2nd edn). New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1996.
83 Gollnick H. Current perspectives on the treatment of acne vulgaris and implications for future directions. J Euro Acad Dermat Venereology 2001; 15 (Suppl 3): 1–4.
84 Bataille V, Snieder H, MacGregor AJ, Sasieni P, Spector TD. The influence of genetics and environmental factors in the pathogenesis of acne: a twin study of acne in women. J Investigative Dermatology 2002; 119: 317–1322.
85 Walton S, Wyatt EH, Cunliffe WJ. Genetic control of sebum excretion and acne—a twin study [comment]. Br J Dermat 1988; 118: 393–396.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
86 Goulden V, McGeown CH, Cunliffe WJ. The familial risk of adult acne: a comparison between first-degree relatives of affected and unaffected individuals. Br J Dermat 1999; 141: 297–300.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
87 Gupta MA, Gupta AK, Schork NJ, Ellis CN, Voorhees JJ. Psychiatric aspects of the treatment of mild to moderate facial acne. Some preliminary observations. Int J Dermat 1990; 29: 719–721.[Medline]
88 Gupta MA, Gupta AK. The psychological comorbidity in acne. Clinics in Dermatology 2001; 19: 360–363.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
89 Hanstock TL, O'Mahony JF. Perfectionism, acne and appearance concerns. Personality & Individual Differences 2002; 32: 1317–1325.
90 Kellett SC, Gawkrodger DJ. The psychological and emotional impact of acne and the effect of treatment with isotretinoin. Br J Dermat 1999; 140: 273–282.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
91 Kilkenny M, Stathakis V, Hibbert ME, Patton G, Caust J, Bowes G. Acne in Victorian adolescents: associations with age, gender, puberty and psychiatric symptoms. Journal of Paediatrics & Child Health 1997; 33: 430–433.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. N Smith, N. J Mann, A. Braue, H. Makelainen, and G. A. Varigos A low-glycemic-load diet improves symptoms in acne vulgaris patients: a randomized controlled trial Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, July 1, 2007; 86(1): 107 - 115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. S. Ford and S. Liu Invited Commentary: Acne in Adolescence--Protecting the Heart but Damaging the Prostate Later in Life? Am. J. Epidemiol., June 15, 2005; 161(12): 1102 - 1106. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||