Dermatological conditions of aquatic athletes

The Comparison of Sun Protection Factor 30 Persistence Between Inorganic and Organic Sunscreen in Swimmers: Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term sun exposure is one of the risks faced by outdoor swimmers and can cause sunburn. Using sunscreen is one way to prevent sunburn; however, physical activity can trigger sweat, friction, and water washing that can interfere with sunscreen efficacy and decrease its sun protection factor (SPF). Sunscreens are classified into inorganic and organic based on their filter. Organic sunscreen has a better bond to the skin than inorganic sunscreen, which forms a barrier above the skin layer that makes removing it easier. Organic sunscreen lasts longer than inorganic sunscreen when used in physical activities, but it has a limited spectrum, is more photolabile, and is more allergenic.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the persistency of SPF 30 between inorganic and organic sunscreens on the back area after 1.5 hours of swimming.

METHODS

This study is a randomized, split-body, double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the persistency of SPF 30 of the inorganic versus organic sunscreens in swimmers. Randomization was done to allocate the participants into treatment groups. Each participant received inorganic and organic sunscreen treatments applied to the back area. The research participants were swimmers from the Cikini swimming pool and Bina Taruna swimming pool, both in Jakarta, Indonesia.

RESULTS

A total of 22 swimmers were enrolled in this study. The analysis showed no significant difference between the SPF of the two sunscreens before swimming (P=.22). After swimming, the SPF levels of both sunscreens decreased: the inorganic sunscreen decreased from a median of 27 (range 23-47) to 12.3 (range 8-19), and the organic sunscreen decreased from a median of 30 (range 24-47) to 9.9 (range 6-19), which was statistically significant (P<.001). When comparing the SPF of inorganic and organic sunscreens after swimming, there was a statistically significant difference in the decrease in SPF levels between the two groups (P=.02), which indicated a better SPF persistence for inorganic sunscreens when compared to organic sunscreens.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a decrease in the SPF levels of inorganic and organic sunscreens after 1.5 hours of swimming, with better persistence in inorganic sunscreens compared to organic sunscreens.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04618536; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04618536.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/42504.

Comparison of Sun Protection Factor (SPF) 30 Persistence Between Inorganic and Organic Sunscreen in Swimmers: Protocol for a Multicenter, Randomized, Noninferiority, Split-Body, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Outdoor swimming athletes are often exposed to undesirable environmental conditions such as long-term sun exposure. The risk of sunburn can still occur in this population due to the loss of sunscreen and an increase in the sensitivity of the skin to ultraviolet rays, particularly ultraviolet B, in wet conditions. Some previous trials showed that organic sunscreens had a longer shelf-life than inorganic sunscreens after exercise due to their characteristics to bind better with the skin layer. Meanwhile, inorganic sunscreens tend to form layers on the skin's surface so that they can be more easily removed. To our knowledge, no studies evaluate sunscreens' resistance, either inorganic or organic, after exercising in Indonesia.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the persistence of inorganic versus organic sunscreens used by swimmers. The primary objective is to assess whether the inorganic sunscreen is as good as the organic sunscreen in the field of the persistence of sunscreens after swimming for 1.5 hours.

METHODS

This study is a randomized, split-body, double-blind, noninferiority, and multicenter clinical trial in Cikini, Jakarta, Indonesia. An estimated 22 athletes in each group, who aged 18-40 years and practice in the morning or afternoon, will be randomized using a computer-generated randomization method. We calculated the sample size using the difference in the average decrease in sun protection factor (SPF) levels that is considered significant based on the clinical judgment set by the researchers, which was 5. Neither the research subjects nor the researchers are aware of the type of sunscreen that will be applied. The hypothesis will be tested using paired-sample t test or Wilcoxon to assess the difference of SPF levels in each group between organic and inorganic sunscreens with SPSS (version 20.0; IBM Corp).

RESULTS

This study has been approved by the Ethical Committee Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia and is funded by the International Publication Grant from Universitas Indonesia. The enrollment process was completed in December 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will test all procedures in preparation for conducting the main study, including several potential obstacles and challenges from the perspective of participating physicians and eligible swimmers. The study results will be disseminated through publications in a peer-reviewed journal with Open Access format. This study will provide information about SPF 30 persistence in sunscreens and the best type of sunscreen to be used while swimming, particularly for athletes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04618536; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04618536?term=NCT04618536.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/42504.

Evaluating and reducing xerosis in competitive swimmers: an in vitro study and randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Xerosis is a common problem with significant sequelae in competitive swimmers, and it results from transepidermal water loss. This study evaluates moisture barriers for reducing xerosis in competitive swimmers.

METHODS

An artificial skin model was used to evaluate five products. Models were measured for changes in thickness and weight over 7 days. The optimal barrier was tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 20 swimmers. Skin moisture content was serially measured. Skin micrographs were scored in a blinded fashion.

RESULTS

The moisture barrier #1 treated skin model at day 7 maintained a mean thickness of 7.08 mm versus 2.38 mm for control (p = .0001). The mean weights of group 1 treated and control groups at day 7 were 40.1 and 8.65 g (p = .03). In the RCT, the group treated with moisture barrier #1 and the controls exhibited low moisture content and moderate xerosis scores at baseline. At week 3, moisture measurements for treated and control groups were 28.6% and 18.2% (p = .003). The mean xerosis scores for the treated and control groups were 8.5 and 12.9 (p = .0008).

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial skin preservation varied for five commercially available moisture barriers. Moisture barrier application improved moisture content and reduced xerosis in competitive swimmers.