Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Pre-/postprocedure measures for minimally invasive, nonenergy aesthetic treatments: A survey.
Gold, Michael H; Andriessen, Anneke; Goldberg, David J; Grover, Komel V; Hu, Shasa; Lorenc, Z Paul; Mandy, Stephen H; Vega, Janelle H.
Afiliação
  • Gold MH; Gold Skin Care Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Andriessen A; School of Medicine and Nursing, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Goldberg DJ; Radboud UMC Nijmegen, Andriessen Consultants, Malden, The Netherlands.
  • Grover KV; Skin Laser & Surgery Specialists of NY and NJ, Hackensack, NJ, USA.
  • Hu S; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
  • Lorenc ZP; Strategic Development, Swiss American CDMO, Dallas, TX, USA.
  • Mandy SH; Dr. Phillip Frost Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
  • Vega JH; Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL, USA.
J Cosmet Dermatol ; 19(7): 1587-1592, 2020 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32521124
BACKGROUND: Non-energy based devices used in aesthetic medicine include treatments such as microdermabrasion, microneedling, threads, and chemical peels. Practitioners may use these devices to address signs of facial photo- and chronological aging (fine lines, wrinkles, pigmentary, and skin textural changes). Currently, consensus papers or guidelines are lacking in peri-procedural measures or their potential role in the prevention or treatment of adverse events in non-energy based aesthetic procedures. AIMS: To explore current practices using non-energy devices, a survey was developed to identify trends in peri-procedure treatment measures. PATIENTS/METHODS: The survey was sent electronically to 2000 dermatologists and 388 plastic surgeons. Randomly selected sites included those practicing medical aesthetics using non-energy devices for facial rejuvenation. The survey gathered information related to practitioner demographics, types of devices used, and peri-procedural measures for non-energy device-based treatments. RESULTS: The survey was active from February to May 2019. Nine hundred and twenty clinicians opened the survey, and 109 surveys were completed, providing a total response rate of 11.8%. The results revealed inconsistencies with regards to skin preparation strategies and post-procedure care. While the majority of clinicians indicated a need for topical treatments to reduce inflammation, prevent scarring, and shorten time to healing, a standard of care was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey confirm a lack of standardized measures for peri-procedural care when using non-energy based devices for aesthetic medicine treatments. These findings emphasize the need for evidence-based recommendations for optimizing patient outcomes, reducing and managing adverse events, and shortening time to healing.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Rejuvenescimento / Envelhecimento da Pele Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Cosmet Dermatol Assunto da revista: DERMATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Rejuvenescimento / Envelhecimento da Pele Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Cosmet Dermatol Assunto da revista: DERMATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos