Complications of facial cosmetic botulinum toxin A injection: analysis of the UK Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency registry and literature review

Real-World Patient Experience With PrabotulinumtoxinA in the United Kingdom: A Single-Center Survey and Analysis of 254 Patients

Background

Botulinum toxin Type A (BoNT-A) injection is the most widely performed nonsurgical cosmetic procedure in the United Kingdom. PrabotulinumtoxinA is a new BoNT-A, recently licensed in the United Kingdom, for treating moderate-to-severe glabellar lines in adults under 65. Although clinical trials have established safety and efficacy, real-world data can help clinicians translate study findings into practice and support prabotulinumtoxinA use in a more diverse patient population.

Objectives

To understand the real-world patient experience and patient perceptions of prabotulinumtoxinA performance for treatment of the glabellar region.

Methods

In this single-center survey study, a single injector administered prabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of glabellar lines to real-world patients presenting for BoNT-A treatment. Two weeks later, patients received surveys asking about their experience through email. There were no incentives for participation. Responses returned within 5 weeks of treatment were included.

Results

From February to June 2023, 457 patients received prabotulinumtoxinA injections for glabellar line treatment. Survey response rate was 56% (254/457 patients). For most patients, treatment onset was 2 to 3 days following injection and peak response occurred after 7 to 10 days. Adverse effects were minimal, with 67% of patients experiencing none. Among survey respondents, 83% rated their treatment positively (5-point satisfaction scale), and 72% would choose prabotulinumtoxinA again.

Conclusions

These data support safety and effectiveness of prabotulinumtoxinA in a diverse, real-world population, and confirm patient satisfaction among experienced BoNT-A patients, as well as suggest a rapid time to onset and peak effect.

Level of Evidence 4

Esthetic Clinic Management Software-Can we improve patient safety?

AIM

To evaluate the features of esthetic-specific Clinic Management Softwares (CMS) and scrutinize these against the General Medical Council (GMC) and Joint Commission (JC) guidance, an indicative CMS framework with GMC and JC compliant features is developed, to improve patient outcomes, service quality, and work toward a centralized database for complications to enable research analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed to evaluate the CMS on the market tailored to esthetic clinics. An analysis was made of the GMC guidance for record keeping and the JC standards for Patient Safety Systems. The CMS features were each scrutinized against the GMC and JC guidance including complication capturing.

RESULTS

Eighteen esthetic-specific CMS were identified and analyzed. None of the included CMSs were 100% compliant with both GMC and JC guidance. In 2022, the mean monthly cost of the basic packages for each of the CMS was £106.4, with a standard deviation of £83.3. The main users of the CMSs were doctors and nurses.

CONCLUSION

CMS are a potentially powerful tool to form a centralized database that will allow for increased transparency on the number of procedures performed as well as complications.

Profiling UK injectable aesthetic practitioners: A national cohort analysis

INTRODUCTION

The United Kingdom (UK) injectables market has been growing rapidly with a lack of robust regulation and to date, no information regarding the profile of practitioners has been published.

AIM

We aim to provide a descriptive and qualitative analysis of the advertised practitioners in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search using the internet search engine Google to perform a qualitative descriptive analysis of aesthetic practitioners in the UK. For each contiguous country in the UK: England, Scotland, and Wales, five searches were performed. The list of practitioners was then cross-referenced with professional regulatory bodies, with extraction of registration number, date of registration and presence or absence from the Specialist Register or General Practitioner Register.

RESULTS

3000 websites were visited and evaluated. 1224 independent clinics with 4405 practitioners were identified. 738 were identified as those in business support functions and the remaining 3667 practitioners were undertaking injectable practice. The profile of professions were doctors 32%, nurses 13%, dentists 24% and dental nurses 8%. Of the 1163 doctors identified 481 were on the specialist register (41%) and 219 were on the GP register (19%). 27 specialties were represented in this cohort analysis. Plastic Surgery formed the majority of those who were on the specialist register at 37%, followed by Dermatology at 18%.

CONCLUSION

This paper is the first to describe the range of practitioners, their professional backgrounds and experience who perform non-surgical aesthetic interventions. The range of backgrounds may have an impact on the potential risks to patients and will be an important consideration in proposed legislation to introduce licensing to the industry.

Quantitative and qualitative analysis of individual experiences post botulinum toxin injection - United Kingdom Survey

Introduction

In the United Kingdom (UK), complications that arise following the administration of Botulinum Toxin are reported to the Medicines and Health Regulatory Agency (MHRA) via the Yellow Card Reporting Scheme. Over the past decade, there has been a significant increase in the number of non-surgical aesthetic procedures. Concerns have been raised that the MHRA is not fully capturing complications in terms of volume and impact on patients.

Aim

This novel study explores the lived experiences of individuals who have experienced an adverse event following administration of Botulinum Toxin for aesthetic purposes. Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies, this analysis evaluates data relating to long-lasting physical, psychological, emotional, and financial sequelae of complications arising from cosmetic Botulinum Toxin injections in the UK.

Methods

A mixed method, qualitative and quantitative approach was adopted to gain comprehensive insights into patients' experiences. A focus group which comprised patient representatives, psychologists, and researchers reached a consensus on a 17-question survey which was disseminated via social media channels. Deductive thematic analysis was used to analyse coded themes. Furthermore, for secondary analysis, sentiment analysis was used computationally as an innovative approach to identify and categorise free text responses associated with sentiments using natural language processing (NLP).

Results

In the study, 655 responses were received, with 287 (44%) of respondents completing all questions. The mean age of respondents was 42.6 years old. 94.1% of respondents identified as female. In the sample, 79% of respondents reported an adverse event following their procedure, with the most common event being reported as 'anxiety'. Findings revealed that 69% of respondents reported long-lasting adverse effects. From the responses, 68.4% reported not having recovered physically, 63.5% of respondents stated that they had not recovered emotionally from complications, and 61.7% said that they have not recovered psychologically. In addition, 84% of respondents stated that they do not know who regulates the aesthetics industry. Furthermore, 92% of participants reported that their clinic or practitioner did not inform them about the Yellow Card Reporting Scheme. The sentiment analysis using the AFINN Lexicon yielded adjusted scores ranging from -3 to +2, with a mean value of -1.58.

Conclusion

This is the largest survey in the UK completed by patients who experienced an adverse outcome following the aesthetic administration of Botulinum Toxin. Our study highlights the extent of the challenges faced by patients who experience an adverse event from physical, emotional, psychological, and financial perspectives. The lack of awareness of MHRA reporting structures and the lack of regulation within the UK's cosmetic injectables sector represent a significant public health challenge.

Cosmetic business mechanics in London: A cross-sectional analysis and audit of ASA compliance

INTRODUCTION

The proliferation of providers and practitioners of cosmetic botulinum toxin and dermal filler has profound public health implications. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) regulates the use of advertising materials in the United Kingdom and prohibits the promotion of prescription-only medicines.

AIMS

We aim to perform a cross-sectional analysis of the practitioners in London, UK to evaluate the distribution of clinics within Greater London, prices advertised for interventions, and compliance with the ASA code. We also aim to identify whether there are any differences in cost of botulinum toxin or dermal filler between the boroughs.

METHODS

Between December 2021 and January 2022, we performed a systematic search using the internet search engine Google. Five searches were performed (1) [london] botox, (2) [london] botulinum toxin, (3) [london] anti wrinkle injection, (4) [london] filler, (5) [london] dermal filler. One hundred websites per search string were systematically reviewed and those which met the inclusion/exclusion criteria of each search string were included and analyzed. Each clinic's product/service range compliance with the ASA/CAP code was assessed. Any reference to Botulinum Toxin or anti-wrinkle injections was noted and analyzed. Further analysis would look to calculate price per milliliter (mL) of botulinum toxin and dermal filler per borough and to calculate whether there were any statistical differences between the 32 different London boroughs.

RESULTS

A total of 500 websites were visited and evaluated. After removal of duplicates, a total of 233 independent clinics was identified. A total of 206 out of the 233 clinics sampled (88%) were in direct infringement of the enforcement notice through advertising a prescription medicine. The overall average cost per mL of dermal filler was £330.89 and there was a statistically significant variance across London boroughs (p < 0.05). The overall average cost per mL of Botulinum Toxin was £284.45 and the variance across London boroughs was close to significant (p = 0.058).

CONCLUSION

This paper demonstrates poor compliance with the ASA/CAP guidelines and further provides an insight into the industry mechanics associated with aesthetic injectables in a major UK city, identifying regional variance in price and clinic density. The advertising of prescription-only medication may pose a potential risk to patients and will be an important consideration in proposed legislation to introduce licensing to the industry.

Developing Consensus-Based Guidelines for Case Reporting in Aesthetic Medicine: Enhancing Transparency and Standardization

Clinical case reporting plays a vital role in sharing detailed patient narratives, providing insights into rare conditions, innovative treatments, and unexpected outcomes. However, existing reporting guidelines in aesthetic medicine fail to capture the specific nuances of procedures and outcomes in this field. The authors' objectives were to develop comprehensive guidelines for Case REporting in Aesthetic Medicine (CREAM). The study employed a 3-phase consensus process, including a literature review, expert interviews, and a consensus meeting. A diverse group of 10 expert participants (plastic surgeons, dermatologists, noncore specialists, evidence-based medicine expert, and research scientist) in Phase I and 30 experienced aesthetic practitioners in Phase II contributed to the research. Statistical analysis was conducted to assess agreement levels among participants and explore associations and variations within the data. The participants represented various specialties, genders, LGBTQ+ identities, and ethnic backgrounds. The research resulted in the development of the CREAM guidelines, consisting of a 16-item checklist. The guidelines covered essential aspects of case reporting, such as patient and practice information, procedure details, clinical assessment and outcomes, adverse events, and ethical considerations. Statistical analysis indicated a high level of consensus among participants, as well as significant associations between checklist items. CREAM guidelines represent a step toward enhancing transparency and standardization in case reporting in aesthetic medicine. Adhering to these guidelines will allow authors to contribute to a robust evidence base, prioritize patient safety, and drive advancements aesthetic medicine.

Botulinum Toxin Type A: Adverse Events and Management

Aesthetic medicine is witnessing an increasing exploitation of all the procedures. The demand has never been higher than it is today. The number of practitioners is also increasing year by year. Consequently complications and other kinds of related troubles and procedures are also rising. Never like today is fundamental, in case of troubles, how to properly manage with the most frequent issues. In aesthetic medicine field, botulinum toxin procedures are the safest. Lot of patients are worried about botulinum toxin despite the available scientific literature. Rare short-term complications are observed. In the most of cases, nothing severe occurs if the international recommendations and the most recent guidelines are closely followed, the majority of them are injection related. This study is a review of rare or common problems that can occur and how to manage or solve the situations.