Perceived Age in Patients Exposed to Distinct UV Indexes: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Photodamage is caused by chronic sun exposure and ultraviolet radiation and presents as wrinkles, sagging, and pigmented spots. An increase in the ultraviolet index can increase a person's perceived age by worsening skin photodamage. However, since the ultraviolet index varies considerably between geographical regions, perceived age might vary substantially among them. This review aims to describe the differences in chronological and perceived age in regions of the world with different ultraviolet indexes. A literature search of three databases was conducted for studies analyzing perceived age and its relationship to sun exposure. Ultraviolet indexes from the included studies were retrieved from the National Weather Service and the Tropospheric Emission Monitoring Internet Service. Out of 104 studies, seven fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, 3,352 patients were evaluated for perceived age. All studies found that patients with the highest daily sun exposures had the highest perceived ages for their chronological age (p < 0.05). People with high sun exposure behaviors living in regions with high ultraviolet indexes will look significantly older than same-aged peers living in lower ultraviolet index regions.

Keywords

perceived age - photoaging - photodamage - ultraviolet light - geographical location

Details of Earlier Presentation

This work was presented as an oral presentation at Plastic Surgery: The Meeting 2021 of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (October 29^th–November 1^st, Atlanta, Georgia, United States).

Authors' Contribution

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. F.R.A., G.G., R.A.T.-G., and K.C.M. performed the literature search and wrote the initial draft. F.R.A. performed the eligibility assessment and data extraction. R.E.C., C.J.B., D.G., and A.J.F. critically revised the work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethical Approval

This manuscript conforms to the Declaration of Helsinki.

Publication History

Article published online:
22 December 2022

• References

• 1 Olshansky SJ, Goldman DP, Zheng Y, Rowe JW. Aging in America in the twenty-first century: demographic forecasts from the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on an Aging Society. Milbank Q 2009; 87 (04) 842-862
• 2 Gilchrest BA, Szabo G, Flynn E, Goldwyn RM. Chronologic and actinically induced aging in human facial skin. J Invest Dermatol 1983; 80 (Suppl): 81s-85s
• 3 Guyuron B, Rowe DJ, Weinfeld AB, Eshraghi Y, Fathi A, Iamphongsai S. Factors contributing to the facial aging of identical twins. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 123 (04) 1321-1331
• 4 Guinot C, Malvy DJ, Ambroisine L. et al. Relative contribution of intrinsic vs extrinsic factors to skin aging as determined by a validated skin age score. Arch Dermatol 2002; 138 (11) 1454-1460
• 5 Larnier C, Ortonne JP, Venot A. et al. Evaluation of cutaneous photodamage using a photographic scale. Br J Dermatol 1994; 130 (02) 167-173
• 6 Ultraviolet (UV) index. Published 2017. Accessed October 30, 2022 at: https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/ultraviolet-(uv)-index
• 7 Ultraviolet radiation. World Health Organization. Accessed October 30, 2022 at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/ultraviolet-radiation
• 8 Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC. et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016; 355: i4919
• 9 Mayes AE, Murray PG, Gunn DA. et al. Ageing appearance in China: biophysical profile of facial skin and its relationship to perceived age. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2010; 24 (03) 341-348
• 10 Mayes AE, Murray PG, Gunn DA. et al. Environmental and lifestyle factors associated with perceived facial age in Chinese women. PLoS One 2010; 5 (12) e15270
• 11 Warren R, Gartstein V, Kligman AM, Montagna W, Allendorf RA, Ridder GM. Age, sunlight, and facial skin: a histologic and quantitative study. J Am Acad Dermatol 1991; 25 (5 Pt 1): 751-760
• 12 Rexbye H, Petersen I, Johansens M, Klitkou L, Jeune B, Christensen K. Influence of environmental factors on facial ageing. Age Ageing 2006; 35 (02) 110-115
• 13 Flament F, Bazin R, Laquieze S, Rubert V, Simonpietri E, Piot B. Effect of the sun on visible clinical signs of aging in Caucasian skin. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2013; 6: 221-232
• 14 Flament F, Bazin R, Qiu H. et al. Solar exposure(s) and facial clinical signs of aging in Chinese women: impacts upon age perception. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2015; 8: 75-84
• 15 Gunn DA, Dick JL, van Heemst D. et al. Lifestyle and youthful looks. Br J Dermatol 2015; 172 (05) 1338-1345
• 16 Coleman SR, Grover R. The anatomy of the aging face: volume loss and changes in 3-dimensional topography. Aesthet Surg J 2006; 26 (1S, 1s): S4-S9
• 17 Berneburg M, Plettenberg H, Krutmann J. Photoaging of human skin. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2000; 16 (06) 239-244
• 18 Dobos G, Lichterfeld A, Blume-Peytavi U, Kottner J. Evaluation of skin ageing: a systematic review of clinical scales. Br J Dermatol 2015; 172 (05) 1249-1261
• 19 Law MH, Medland SE, Zhu G. et al; MuTHER Consortium. Genome-wide association shows that pigmentation genes play a role in skin aging. J Invest Dermatol 2017; 137 (09) 1887-1894
• 20 Roberts V, Main B, Timpson NJ, Haworth S. Genome-wide association study identifies genetic associations with perceived age. J Invest Dermatol 2020; 140 (12) 2380-2385
• 21 Borkan GA, Bachman SS, Norris AH. Comparison of visually estimated age with physiologically predicted age as indicators of rates of aging. Soc Sci Med 1982; 16 (02) 197-204
• 22 Christensen K, Iachina M, Rexbye H. et al. “Looking old for your age”: genetics and mortality. Epidemiology 2004; 15 (02) 251-252
• 23 Gunn DA, Larsen LA, Lall JS, Rexbye H, Christensen K. Mortality is Written on the Face. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2016; 71 (01) 72-77