A review of hand-held, home-use cosmetic laser and light devices.

BACKGROUND: As the market for home-use light-based and laser-based devices grows, consumers will increasingly seek advice from dermatologists regarding their safety and efficacy profiles. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on home-use hand-held devices for various dermatologic conditions. To educate dermatologists about commercially available products their patients may be using. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of home-use laser and light devices for the treatment of the following: hair removal, acne, photoaging, scars, psoriasis, and hair regrowth. In addition, a thorough search of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) radiation-emitting electronic products' database was performed; by searching specific product codes, all hand-held devices that are FDA-approved for marketing in the United States were identified. RESULTS: Of the various home-use devices reviewed, intense pulsed light (IPL) for hair removal and light-emitting diode (LED) for treatment of acne have the most published data. Although the literature shows modest results for home-use IPL and LED, small sample sizes and short follow-up periods limit interpretation. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of randomized, double-blind controlled trials to support the use of home-use laser and light devices; smaller, uncontrolled industry-sponsored single-center studies suggest that some of these devices may have modest results.

Skin cancer education for massage therapists: a novel approach to the early detection of suspicious lesions.

Studies indicate that with training, nonmedical health professionals may be able to successfully recognize lesions suspicious for skin cancer and thereby assist with early detection of suspicious lesions. We present the results of a study aimed at assessing the efficacy of a 4-h continuing education program designed to educate massage therapists about skin cancer detection and prevention. Prior to and after the administration of the course, surveys were administered to attendees to gauge their ability to identify skin cancer and their comfort level with counseling clients with suspicious lesions. Our study suggests that while many massage therapists are educated on skin cancer and have experience referring patients for suspicious lesions, a 4-h educational session may not be sufficient to improve sensitivity of detection.

Combination treatments for psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the current state of evidence for combination topical and systemic therapies for mild to severe psoriasis. DATA SOURCES: We performed a systematic search for all entries in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Review, and EMBASE related to combination treatments for psoriasis through July 2010. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials that reported proportion of disease clearance or mean change in clinical severity score (or provided these data through communication with study authors) for efficacy of a combination treatment for psoriasis compared with 1 or more corresponding monotherapies. DATA EXTRACTION: Study data were extracted by 3 independent investigators, with disagreement resolved by consensus. The proportion of patients who achieved clearance, definition of clearance, means and standard deviations for baseline disease symptom score and final disease symptom score, and major design characteristics were extracted for each study. DATA SYNTHESIS: Combination treatments consisting of vitamin D derivative and corticosteroid, vitamin D derivative and UV-B, vitamin A derivative and psoralen-UV-A, vitamin A derivative and corticosteroid, vitamin A derivative and UV-B, corticosteroid and hydrocolloid occlusion dressings, UV-B and alefacept, and vitamins A and D derivatives were more effective than 1 or more monotherapies using the likelihood of clearance as the outcome. Blinding status and potency of the corticosteroid treatment used were significant sources of heterogeneity between studies. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the need for additional long-term trials with standardized outcome measures to evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of combination therapies for psoriasis and highlight the possible effects of trial design characteristics on results.