UV Photography Shows that Melanoma Risk Factors Correlate with Sun Damage

April 26, 2012 | by

There are a number of physical characteristics associated with increased risk of skin cancer, and more specifically, with melanoma, a particularly dangerous and aggressive form of skin cancer. These include blue eyes, red hair, freckles on the face, a significant number of moles on the body, and light skin. While these factors have long been used by dermatologists to predict those individuals who would be at greatest risk of melanoma, a new study in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology uses a novel approach to demonstrate that there’s a relationship between these factors and visible signs of sun damage [1]. Researchers used ultraviolet (UV) photography to compare the skin of 12-year-old participants; under UV light, sun damaged areas appear darkened. UV photographic equipment is similar in many regards to the tools employed in regular photography, though the flash is UV rather than visible light, and much of the processing software is different.

UV skin damage
A 35-year-old melanoma survivor. Skin under normal (left) and UV light (right). Dark areas on the right is damage from the sun.

Those pre-teens with multiple melanoma risk factors had increased sun damage compared to those with fewer risk factors. This finding is particularly distressing given that the signs of sun damage in those with multiple risk factors were significant, even relatively early in life.

The researchers suggest that UV photography could be incorporated into sun awareness intervention programs, as seeing a photograph of existing sun damage can be more persuasive to teens and young adults than vague warnings about the dangers of sun exposure. Further, note the researchers, the results of the study suggest that UV photography is most likely to be an effective intervention technique for those individuals who have multiple melanoma risk factors, as they are most likely to show significant sun damage early in life.

Reference

  1. Gamble et al. Sun damage in ultraviolet photographs correlates with phenotypic melanoma risk factors in 12-year-old children. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Mar 9. [Epub ahead of print]
    View abstract

Tackling Heart Disease Together or Alone: The Behavioural Science of Self-Management

June 24, 2009 | by
ResearchBlogging.org

Heart disease is the leading killer in the U.S. and throughout most of Europe. People’s behaviour can protect and reduce risk of heart disease, and interventions to help people “self-manage” exist. But what is the best way to “self-manage”? A recent study shows that group programmes and self-directed programmes have remarkably different effects [1].

heart-disease

Self-management interventions exist for many health problems. They are notoriously difficult to define. One thorough definition is that it relates to activities undertaken by the person who has a “chronic” or “long-term” condition such as asthma, multiple sclerosis or arthritis. These activities include problem solving, decision making, resource utilization, the formation of a patient-provider partnership, action planning and self tailoring [2]. Interventions or programmes are designed around these activities to help support people to manage their own illness. The idea is that following attendance at a programme of some sort, the activities and skills learned will be continued to be used, thus improving health, maintaining fitness and/or quality of life and reducing the risk of future acute episodes of ill health. These interventions are popular for many reasons, including the relatively low cost to health service providers as interventions can be delivered by health-care professionals or by people with the relevant condition who have been trained, or a mixture of both. Self-management interventions also allow people with long-term conditions to be meet in a group with people with similar conditions. The experience of being in a group, knowing one is not alone and sharing stories is thought to play some part in the effectiveness of self-management interventions. But to what extent is this true?