Next Article in Journal
Nursing Experience of New Nurses Caring for COVID-19 Patients in Military Hospitals: A Qualitative Study
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Changes in Multiple Chronic Conditions on Medical Costs among Older Adults in South Korea
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Healthcare
Volume 10
Issue 4
10.3390/healthcare10040743
healthcare-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Exploration of the Use and Impact of Preventive Measures on Skin Cancer

by
Man Hung
1,2,3,*,
Isaac Rex Beazer
4,
Sharon Su
1,
Jerry Bounsanga
5,
Eric S. Hon
6 and
Martin S. Lipsky
1
1
College of Dental Medicine, Roseman University of Health Sciences, South Jordan, UT 84095, USA
2
School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA
3
Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
4
College of Pharmacy, Roseman University of Health Sciences, South Jordan, UT 84095, USA
5
Merit Medical Systems, Inc., South Jordan, UT 84095, USA
6
Department of Economics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Healthcare 2022, 10(4), 743; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10040743
Submission received: 28 March 2022 / Revised: 12 April 2022 / Accepted: 13 April 2022 / Published: 15 April 2022
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer, and both clinical and epidemiological data link cumulative solar dosages and the number of sunburns to skin cancer. Each year, more than 5.4 million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed, incurring a significant health and financial burden. Recommended preventive measures for skin cancer include the use of sunscreen, sun avoidance, and protective clothing. This study used a national database to examine the association of preventive measures with the prevalence of skin cancer, specifically analyzing the preventive measures of sunscreen use, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts. The second aim was to determine which characteristics, if any, correlated with using prevention measures. Methods: This study analyzed data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey 2015–2016 cycle to examine the association of three preventive measures (using sunscreen, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts) with skin cancer. Logistic regression and chi-square tests were utilized to examine the relationship between skin cancer and these prevention methods. Results: Sunscreen use (OR = 3.752; p < 0.05) was statistically associated with a lower prevalence of skin cancer, while wearing long-sleeved shirts (OR = 6.911; p = 0.064) and staying in the shade (OR = 0.646; p = 0.481) did not emerge as factors significantly associated with a lower prevalence after controlling for gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, income, health insurance, and general health. Additionally, men and individuals of color were less likely to use sunscreen. Conclusion: Sunscreen use was associated with a lower prevalence of skin cancer, while wearing long-sleeved shirts and staying in the shade was not significantly linked to lower rates of skin cancer, suggesting that these measures may not be as effective as sunscreen for preventing skin cancer. Men and individuals of color were significantly less likely to use sunscreen. These findings can help guide future education efforts and research regarding skin cancer prevention and suggest the need to develop male-oriented programs to mitigate the gender disparity in employing sun-protection measures.

1. Introduction

Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, with an average of 4.9 million adults treated annually [1]. Each year, more than 5.4 million new cases of skin cancer are diagnosed, outweighing the new cases of all other cancers combined [2]. Its widespread prevalence incurs significant health and financial burdens, and from 2007 to 2011, skin cancer treatment averaged an annual cost of $8.1 billion [1,3]. In addition, both melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) are associated with fatal outcomes [4].
Clinical and epidemiological data link cumulative solar dosages and the number of sunburns to skin damage and NMSC [5]. Preventive measures recommended to reduce skin cancers include physical barriers (e.g., hats, sunglasses, and clothing), sun avoidance measures (e.g., limiting sun exposure during peak hours and seeking shade), and using sunscreen [2,6]. The American Cancer Society and the Cancer Council Australia recommend all three measures as primary preventive activities [7,8,9]. Despite campaigns to promote these protective measures, studies indicate that many individuals fail to follow this advice, and the incidence of skin cancer continues to increase [10].
Most studies on sun protection focus on photodamage to skin deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as their primary outcome, and fewer studies evaluate the use effectiveness for reducing skin cancer as an outcome measure. Evidence demonstrates that wearing sun-protective clothing and avoiding sun exposure reduces exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation and the risk of sunburn [11]. Sunburn is often used as a biomarker of skin cancer risk, and research indicates that sunburn at any age increases skin cancer risk, suggesting that protective clothing and seeking shade reduce skin cancer risk [12]. However, data showing that these protective measures reduce skin cancer are more limited [13,14]. Explanations for this seeming paradox are that standard clothing materials may not always be effective in preventing the effects of UV radiation on the skin; that individuals may not consistently wear protective clothing; or that by seeking shade, individuals increase their total UV exposure by staying outdoors for longer periods [14].
Another strategy to prevent skin cancer is sunscreen, and for children, it remains the most frequently used sun protection measure [9]. While studies demonstrate that sunscreen reduces DNA photodamage, epidemiological studies raise doubts about its effectiveness in reducing skin cancer among the general population [15]. Although Green and colleagues found that regular sunscreen use reduced the incidence of melanoma [16] and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) [17,18], other studies found little protection [19], and some even observed an increase in skin lesions among sunscreen users [20]. Sunscreen also requires proper use, including application before sun exposure and frequent reapplication [21]. Use effectiveness may not match theoretical effectiveness since sunscreen use in real conditions may not be ideal [22]. Even when used properly, one study examining eight US Food and Drug Administration-approved sunscreen compounds found that when used individually, these compounds did not prevent squamous cell carcinoma [23], and a 2018 meta-analysis did not confirm the expected protective benefits of sunscreen against skin cancer in the general population [15]. A Cochrane database review also found insufficient evidence to conclude that sunscreen use reduced the risk of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or cutaneous squamous SCC [21].
Sun avoidance—seeking shade and avoiding exposure during the peak hours of 10 AM to 3 PM—is also a commonly used sun protection method [24,25]. However, while this strategy reduces total UV exposure, its effectiveness in reducing skin cancer risk remains uncertain [25,26,27,28], and studies indicate that seeking shade alone does not decrease the risk of skin cancer [29]. Additionally, few adults regularly use more than one preventive measure [30], and it may be that those avoiding peak sun exposure may be less likely to combine this strategy with a physical barrier or sunscreen, thus limiting its effectiveness [21].
Using a national database, this study examined whether the use of three commonly recommended preventive measures—using sunscreen, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts—were associated with a lower risk of developing skin cancer. In addition, research suggests that characteristics such as gender, age, income, and ethnicity play a role in the utilization of sun protection [31,32,33,34]. Understanding the factors associated with prevention is important, and a second study aim was to determine which characteristics, if any, correlated with using sunscreen, staying in the shade, and wearing long-sleeved shirts. Identifying associations between using these measures and demographic characteristics can lead to more focused education and more effectively direct future intervention and prevention efforts.

2. Materials and Methods

This study analyzed data from the 2015–2016 National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) [35,36]. The NHANES is a survey conducted in two-year cycles throughout the 50 states and Washington D.C. that uses complex multistage probability sampling to represent the general, non-institutionalized United States population [35,36]. NHANES oversamples certain population subgroups to increase the reliability and precision of health status indicator estimates for these particular subgroups. The survey consists of two portions: an interview, including demographic, socioeconomic, dietary, and health-related questions, and a physical examination, including medical, dental, and physiological measurements and laboratory tests. Survey information includes data on the prevalence of multiple diseases as well as associated risk factors and exposures. The survey was administered to either participants or their proxies. Screeners interviewed participants who were 16 years or older and emancipated minors. For participants who were under the age of 16 years old and for those who could not answer the survey questions, an adult proxy answered on their behalf. Participation in the NHANES was by invitation only, and invited participants were required to live in one of fifteen designated counties in the United States during the data collection cycle.
This study used the 2015–2016 survey as its data source, which consisted of 9971 individuals who were interviewed, 9544 of whom were also examined. After excluding 3979 participants under the age of 18 years old, the final study sample consisted of 5992 individuals aged 18 years and older.

2.1. Data Collection

The NHANES utilizes self- and proxy-reported personal interview data on various health conditions and medical histories for the medical conditions segment of the survey [35,36]. These questions were administered at home by the computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) system using trained interviewers. The CAPI system contains consistency checks to reduce errors in data entry and utilizes online help screens to assist interviewers with terms in the questionnaire. Specifically, the dermatology section of the survey deals with questions regarding sun exposure and sun-protective behavior.

2.2. Measures

Questions from the NHANES medical conditions segment consisted of “Ever told you had cancer or malignancy?” and “What kind of cancer was it?”, with options for skin cancer, such as melanoma, nonmelanoma, and unknown. From the dermatology section of the survey, questions regarding preventive measures were utilized for this study. These included “When you go outside on a very sunny day for more than one hour, how often do you stay in the shade?”, “When you go outside on a very sunny day for more than one hour, how often do you wear a long-sleeved shirt?”, and “When you go outside on a very sunny day for more than one hour, would you use sunscreen?” Options for answers consisted of “always”, “most of the time”, “sometimes”, “rarely”, “never”, “refused to answer”, or “don’t know” [35,36].

2.3. Analytic Approach

Demographics of participants diagnosed with skin cancer and those without skin cancer were reported using descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations (SD). Logistic regressions were performed to explore the association of prevention methods with skin cancer. The three preventive methods included using sunscreen, staying under the shade, and wearing a long-sleeved shirt. Covariates included age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, income, health insurance, and general health. Chi-square tests were applied to examine the relationship between prevention methods and skin cancer. Additionally, sunscreen use by gender and race, staying in the shade by gender and race, and wearing a long-sleeved shirt by gender and race were examined using chi-square analyses. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also conducted to identify an independent effect of each of the preventive measures. Separate logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the incremental value of staying in the shade and wearing a long-sleeved shirt to the use of sunscreen in the prevention of skin cancer. Odds ratios (ORs) were reported along with statistical significance, set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 25.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY: IBM Corp).

3. Results

The study sample totaled 5992 participants in the NHANES dataset and among the participants, 161 reported skin cancer. Table 1 displays the demographic characteristics of the sample. Of the 161 participants who reported having been diagnosed with skin cancer, 55.3% were males, 87.6% were Caucasian, and approximately one-third had a college degree. The average age was 69.5 years old (SD = 11.7; range = 20–80), over half were married, and 22% had a household income greater than $100 000. Of the 5165 without skin cancer, the average age was 47.7 years old (SD = 17.2; range = 20–80). The majority of those who did not have skin cancer were non-Hispanic with a high school education or above. Men experienced more skin cancer than women, with the difference in skin cancer between men and women approaching statistical significance (p = 0.07).
Among the study population with skin cancer, nonmelanoma skin cancer was the most prevalent type (Table 2) and was significantly more common than either melanoma (p < 0.05) or unknown skin cancer types (p < 0.05). However, the proportion of melanoma compared with unknown skin cancer types did not differ significantly (p = 0.52).
Of the 5992 participants, a subset completed questionnaires on skin cancer and preventive measures (wearing a long-sleeved shirt, staying in the shade, and using sunscreen). There were a total of 2224 participants who completed both the skin cancer questionnaire and the wearing a long-sleeved shirt question, 2769 who completed both the skin cancer questionnaire and the staying in the shade question, and 2915 who completed both the skin cancer questionnaire and the using sunscreen question. Among those who responded to the protective measure questions, males were significantly less likely than females to use sunscreen (p < 0.05), and Black participants were less likely than other racial groups to use sunscreen (p < 0.05). Regarding staying in the shade, females reported using this protective measure more often than males (p < 0.05), and Hispanic participants more often than other racial groups (p < 0.05). Males tended to wear long-sleeved shirts more frequently than females (p < 0.05), and White participants tended to wear long-sleeved shirts more often than other racial groups (p < 0.05).
Univariate analysis indicated that sunscreen usage (OR = 3.752; p < 0.05) was significantly linked to a lower prevalence of skin cancer, and staying in the shade (OR = 6.911; p =0.064) was marginally significant; however, wearing a long-sleeved shirt did not have a significant association with skin cancer (OR = 0.646; p = 0.481) (Table 3). After controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, income, health insurance, and general health, sunscreen usage was not correlated with a significantly lower incidence of skin cancer (adjusted OR = 0.956; p = 0.949) (Table 4), demonstrating that the effects of sunscreen use on skin cancer vary across demographics. Table 5 presents results from the stepwise logistic regression analysis showing that wearing a long-sleeved shirt (adjusted OR = 1.182; p = 0.813) did not add incremental value to sunscreen in the protection against skin cancer.

4. Discussion

Ideally, sun protection recommendations should be backed by strong scientific evidence. Evidence that the vast majority of skin cancers are caused by solar UV radiation exposure is accepted and provides the rationale for promoting sun protection [37] measures, such as sun avoidance, wearing long sleeved shirts, and using sunscreen. However, epidemiological studies raise doubts about the use effectiveness of these measures in reducing the incidence of skin cancer [15]. This study adds to the literature by providing comparative data on sun-protective behaviors and their association with skin cancer. A systematic review failed to identify studies that evaluated the benefits of sun-protective clothing or seeking shade when outdoors, and to our knowledge, this is one of the first studies to specifically examine these sun protection measures [21]. We found that sunscreen use was associated with a significantly lower risk of having all types of skin cancer, but this association varied across demographics.
Our results indicate that while sunscreen use was associated with a significantly lower risk of having all types of skin cancer, wearing a long-sleeved shirt was not linked to a reduction in skin cancer. While the univariate results identified that staying in the shade was marginally associated with a reduced risk of skin cancer, there was an insufficient sample size to evaluate the multivariate association when controlling for confounding variables. One reason may be that these protective actions alter behavior, leading to spending more time in the sun and increasing overall exposure. Although sunscreen prevents sunburn, evidence that it prevents skin cancer is surprisingly sparse [15,38]. Some research suggests that sunscreen might paradoxically increase the risk of skin cancer by instilling a false sense of security that leads to an increased duration of intentional sun exposure [20,39]. While more recent research found that using sunscreen does not increase the risk of skin cancer, a systematic review failed to confirm the expected protective benefits of sunscreen against skin cancer in the general population [40]. Our findings add to the literature that does support the benefits of sunscreen as a preventive measure [41] by being one of the few studies to use a nationally representative US database to link a lower incidence of skin cancer to sunscreen use across all skin cancer types. Although they are observational and cross-sectional, the findings corroborate the seminal randomized control study demonstrating the beneficial effects of sunscreen use on skin cancer by linking sunscreen use to fewer skin cancers in the context of real-world use among a general population [16,17,42]. The cost of treating skin cancer is disproportionately increasing compared with other cancers, and in 2012 alone, providers received $77 billion in Medicare payments [43]; in addition to supporting a reduction in the clinical burden of disease, our findings support sunscreen use as an inexpensive means to help reduce rising healthcare costs.
Although the reason why the findings reported here regarding sunscreen use may differ from earlier studies is uncertain, one possible explanation is the improvement in sunscreen formulations and UV blockage over the last two decades. In addition, public messaging and better product labeling might translate into improved application techniques with more consistent application, reapplication, and adequate amounts of sunscreen use. Further research is needed to confirm these findings regarding sunscreen.
While they are promoted as preventive measures, unexpectedly, our findings did not identify seeking shade or wearing long-sleeved shirts as measures associated with a lower risk of skin cancer. One reason may be that shade only partially blocks UV radiation and depends on the shading structure and the amount of surface reflectance [44]. In addition, the effectiveness of clothing for blocking solar radiation depends on several factors, such as fabric density, thickness, material, and color [45]. The NHANES survey does not distinguish between clothing types, so it may be that individuals reporting wearing long sleeves might have worn clothing without good UV protection. Combining wearing long-sleeved shirts and sunscreen did not add incremental benefit to sunscreen use alone in preventing skin cancer. This finding suggests the importance of incorporating and perhaps prioritizing sunscreen in skin cancer prevention strategies. Similar to earlier research, this study found that men were about half as likely to use sunscreen either always or frequently when compared with women and adds to the literature about gender differences in attitudes and behavior regarding sun protection [46,47,48]. Skin cancer is more prevalent in men, and tailoring promotions to men to increase their use of sunscreen has the potential to reduce gender-related disparities in skin cancer incidence.
Effective prevention interventions incorporate the dual mechanism of the decision to initiate protective behaviors and the inherent progressions to embed these behaviors as habits [49,50]. For skin protection, this includes recognizing the threat of skin cancer and the belief there are effective and easy behaviors to perform that reduce risk. For men, higher levels of masculinity are associated with lower levels of sun-protective behaviors and skin cancer prevention. One strategy might be to bundle sun protection interventions with other healthy lifestyle measures and, by clustering lifestyle factors, develop a comprehensive approach to health behaviors impacted by masculinity [33]. Interventions that may be more effective in men include incorporating humor [51], messaging that focuses on lowering the fear of skin cancer [52], providing free sunscreen, developing work-based sun protection programs, linking sunscreen characteristics to skin type, and clinicians unequivocally recommending that men use sunscreen. Male resistance to sunscreen use is also rooted in masculine cultural values and beliefs such as equating sunscreen with cosmetics and viewing sunscreen as a product more for women than men.
Of the racial groups studied, Black participants were less likely to wear sunscreen, a behavior that may be related to the perception that they are at low risk for skin cancer [53]. African Americans may also experience less access to sunscreen because of fewer drug stores and grocery stores selling sunscreen in African American neighborhoods and less sunscreen counseling by health care providers [54]. Although skin cancer is less common in people of color, when it does occur, it is often associated with increased morbidity and mortality [55,56]. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is the most common skin malignancy among dark-skinned individuals [57], and since sunscreen may have a preventive effect on SCC [18], promoting sunscreen use among individuals of color has the potential to reduce the skin cancer outcome disparities seen in individuals of color. Older adults and individuals with less education also perceived themselves as being at a lower risk for skin cancer. To address these misconceptions, public health educational programs directed toward these demographics could also help to reduce skin cancer prevalence.
Finally, the ultimate goal is to reduce the overall burden of skin cancer. The complexity of skin cancer prevention extends beyond just dermatologic issues and requires a multi-dimensional approach that incorporates an array of factors, such as the psychology of prevention, health perceptions about suntanned skin, the characteristics of target populations, attitudes toward applying chemical sunscreens, cost, social influencers, and indirect media messaging [58]. Future multi-disciplinary, collaborative research to explore these complex interactions can help reach the ultimate public health goal of reducing the burden of skin cancer.

Limitations and Strengths

This study has both limitations and strengths. A key limitation is that since this is a cross-sectional study, the results demonstrate an association rather than establishing a causal relationship between a sun protection measure and skin cancer prevention. While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide a higher degree of evidence, they may take decades to detect a protective benefit from sunscreen use, and withholding sun protection from a control group raises ethical concerns. In the absence of RCTs, epidemiological observations such as those in this study offer useful information to guide recommendations. Another limitation is that the data were self-reported and subject to recall bias. However, self-reported sun protection data have been shown to be adequate, with correlations between self-reporting and observation ranging from 0.51 to 0.83 [59]. Data about the amount of sun exposure were also self-reported, but there is no reason to suspect any systematic bias among the sample groups. Each of the three racial groups used in this study (i.e., White, Hispanic, and Black) includes a wide range of skin pigmentation, and the data do not account for variation in pigmentation among these groups. By contrast, the study strengths include the use of a comprehensive database that draws a diverse sample of participants; in addition, this study is representative of the real-world use of protection measures among the general population. The collection of participant information also allowed adjustment for possible confounders.
Since the relationship between sun exposure may differ by skin cancer type [60], the effectiveness of sun protection measures may differ as well. For example, it is possible that staying in the shade and wearing long-sleeved shirts afford protection to those with a family history of skin cancer, those with occupational exposure, others at high risk for skin cancer, or males. Analyses stratifying by skin cancer type were not performed because of the low sample size, especially for rarer types of skin cancer. However, public messaging promotes protective measures as being universally applicable to skin cancer protection, and our study assesses this message.

5. Conclusions

Sunscreen use was associated with a lower prevalence of skin cancer, while wearing long-sleeved shirts and staying in the shade or combining these protective measures with sunscreen use were not. This finding suggests the importance of incorporating and perhaps emphasizing sunscreen in skin cancer prevention strategies. Men, individuals of color, and those with lower incomes were significantly less likely to use sunscreen. These findings can help guide future education efforts for skin cancer prevention and highlight the importance of developing male-oriented programs to help mitigate gender disparities.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.H. and M.S.L.; methodology, M.H. and M.S.L.; data collection, M.H., J.B. and E.S.H.; statistical analysis, M.H., J.B. and E.S.H.; writing—original draft preparation, M.H., I.R.B. and S.S.; writing—review and editing, M.H., I.R.B., S.S., J.B., E.S.H. and M.S.L.; supervision, M.H.; funding acquisition, M.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

No external funding was received for this study.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings are available from the National Center for Health Statistics.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Roseman University College of Dental Medicine Clinical Outcomes Research and Education for the support of this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Abbreviations

BCCbasal cell carcinoma
CAPIcomputer-assisted personal interview
DNAdeoxyribonucleic acid
NHANESNational Health and Nutritional Examination Survey
NMSCnonmelanoma skin cancer
ORodds ratio
RCTrandomized controlled trial
SCCsquamous cell carcinoma
SDstandard deviation
UVultraviolet

References

  1. Guy, G.P., Jr.; Machlin, S.R.; Ekwueme, D.U.; Yabroff, K.R. Prevalence and costs of skin cancer treatment in the U.S.; 2002–2006 and 2007–2011. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2015, 48, 183–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. American Cancer Society. Don’t Fry: Preventing Skin Cancer. 2019. Available online: https://www.cancer.org/research/infographics-gallery/skin-cancer-prevention.html (accessed on 8 August 2021).
  3. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2022. 2022. Available online: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-and-figures/2022/2022-cancer-facts-and-figures.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  4. Barton, V.; Armeson, K.; Hampras, S.; Ferris, L.K.; Visvanathan, K.; Rollison, D.; Alberg, A.J. Nonmelanoma skin cancer and risk of all-cause and cancer-related mortality: A systematic review. Archives for Dermatological Research. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 2017, 309, 243–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Calzavara-Pinton, P.; Ortel, B.; Venturini, M. Non-melanoma skin cancer, sun exposure and sun protection. G. Ital. Di Dermatol. E Venereol. 2015, 150, 369–378. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26186380 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  6. Hill, L.; Ferrini, R.L. Skin cancer prevention and screening: Summary of the American College of Preventive Medicine’s practice policy statements. CA Cancer J. Clin. 1998, 48, 232–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. American Cancer Society. How Do I Protect Myself from Ultraviolet UV Rays? 2019. Available online: https://www.cancer.org/healthy/be-safe-in-sun/uv-protection.html (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  8. Montague, M.; Borland, R.; Sinclair, C. Slip! Slop! Slap! and SunSmart, 1980–2000: Skin cancer control and 20 years of population-based campaigning. Health Educ. Behav. 2001, 28, 290–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Stanton, W.R.; Janda, M.; Baade, P.D.; Anderson, P. Primary prevention of skin cancer: A review of sun protection in Australia and internationally. Health Promot. Int. 2004, 19, 369–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Halpern, A.C.; Kopp, L.J. Awareness, knowledge and attitudes to non-melanoma skin cancer and actinic keratosis among the general public. Int. J. Dermatol. 2005, 44, 107–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Holman, D.M.; Ding, H.; Guy, G.P., Jr.; Watson, M.; Hartman, A.M.; Perna, F.M. Prevalence of sun protection use and sunburn and association of demographic and bhaviorial characteristics with sunburn among US adults. JAMA Dermatol. 2018, 154, 561–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Dennis, L.K.; Vanbeek, M.J.; Beane Freeman, L.E.; Smith, B.J.; Dawson, D.V.; Coughlin, J.A. Sunburns and risk of cutaneous melanoma: Does age matter? A comprehensive meta-analysis. Ann. Epidemiol. 2008, 18, 614–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Lazovich, D.; Vogel, R.I.; Berwick, M.; Weinstock, M.A.; Warshaw, E.M.; Anderson, K.E. Melanoma risk in relation to use of sunscreen or other sun protection methods. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2011, 20, 2583–2593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Tarbuk, A.; Grancaric, A.M.; Situm, M.; Martinis, M. UV clothing and skin cancer. Coll. Antropol. 2010, 34 (Suppl. S2), S179–S183. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21302719 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  15. Silva, E.S.D.; Tavares, R.; Paulitsch, F.D.S.; Zhang, L. Use of sunscreen and risk of melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Dermatol. 2018, 28, 186–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Green, A.C.; Williams, G.M.; Logan, V.; Strutton, G.M. Reduced melanoma after regular sunscreen use: Randomized trial follow-up. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29, 257–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Green, A.; Williams, G.; Neale, R.; Hart, V.; Leslie, D.; Parsons, P.; Marks, G.C.; Gaffney, P.; Battistutta, D.; Frost, C.; et al. Daily sunscreen application and betacarotene supplementation in prevention of basal-cell and squamous-cell carcinomas of the skin: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1999, 354, 723–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. van der Pols, J.C.; Williams, G.M.; Pandeya, N.; Logan, V.; Green, A.C. Prolonged prevention of squamous cell carcinoma of the skin by regular sunscreen use. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2006, 15, 2546–2548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Youl, P.; Aitken, J.; Hayward, N.; Hogg, D.; Liu, L.; Lassam, N.; Martin, N. Melanoma in adolescents: A case-control study of risk factors in Queensland, Australia. Int. J. Cancer 2002, 98, 92–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Planta, M.B. Sunscreen and melanoma: Is our prevention message correct? J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 2011, 24, 735–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sanchez, G.; Nova, J.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, A.E.; Medina, R.D.; Solorzano-Restrepo, C.; Gonzalez, J.; Olmos, M.; Godfrey, K.; Arevalo-Rodriguez, I. Sun protection for preventing basal cell and squamous cell skin cancers. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2016, 7, CD011161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Petersen, B.; Datta, P.; Philipsen, P.A.; Wulf, H.C. Sunscreen use and failures—On site observations on a sun-holiday. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2013, 12, 190–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Bode, A.M.; Roh, E. Are FDA-approved sunscreen components effective in preventing solar UV-induced skin cancer? Cells 2020, 9, 1674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. National Cancer Institute. Cancer Trends Progress Report. 2020. Available online: https://progressreport.cancer.gov/ (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  25. Holman, D.M.; Kapelos, G.T.; Shoemaker, M.; Watson, M. Shade as an environmental design tool for skin cancer prevention. Am. J. Public Health 2018, 108, 1607–1612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Downs, N.J.; Parisi, A.V.; Igoe, D. Measurements of occupational ultraviolet exposure and the implications of timetabled yard duty for school teachers in Queensland, Australia: Preliminary results. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B Biol. 2014, 131, 84–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Parisi, A.V.; Turnbull, D.J. Shade provision for UV minimization: A review. Photochem. Photobiol. 2014, 90, 479–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Vanos, J.K.; McKercher, G.R.; Naughton, K.; Lochbaum, M. Schoolyard shade and sun exposure: Assessment of personal monitoring during children’s physical activity. Photochem. Photobiol. 2017, 93, 1123–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Tizek, L.; Schielein, M.C.; Berger, U.; Ege, M.J.; Schneider, S.; Zink, A. Skin cancer risk and shade: Comparing the risk of foresters with other outdoor workers. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2020, 34, 2526–2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bleakley, A.; Lazovich, D.; Jordan, A.B.; Glanz, K. Compensation behaviors and skin cancer prevention. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2018, 55, 848–855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Falk, M.; Anderson, C.D. Influence of age, gender, educational level and self-estimation of skin type on sun exposure habits and readiness to increase sun protection. Cancer Epidemiol. 2013, 37, 127–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Holman, D.M.; Berkowitz, Z.; Guy, G.P., Jr.; Hawkins, N.A.; Saraiya, M.; Watson, M. Patterns of sunscreen use on the face and other exposed skin among US adults. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2015, 73, 83–92.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Merten, J.W.; King, J.L.; Vilaro, M.J.; Largo-Wight, E. Lifestyle factors associated with sunscreen use among young adults. Am. J. Lifestyle Med. 2018, 12, 331–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Pinault, L.; Fioletov, V. Sun Exposure, Sun Protection and Sunburn among Canadian Adults. Health Rep. 2017, 28, 12–19. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28513819 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  35. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015–2016 Data Documentation, Codebook, and Frequencies. 2017. Available online: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/Nchs/Nhanes/2015-2016/MCQ_I.htm (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  36. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015–2016. 2017. Available online: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/continuousnhanes/default.aspx?BeginYear=2015 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  37. Hirst, N.G.; Gordon, L.G.; Scuffham, P.A.; Green, A.C. Lifetime cost-effectiveness of skin cancer prevention through promotion of daily sunscreen use. Value Health 2012, 15, 261–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Lazovich, D.; Choi, K.; Vogel, R.I. Time to get serious about skin cancer prevention. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2012, 21, 1893–1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Autier, P.; Boniol, M.; Dore, J.F. Sunscreen use and increased duration of intentional sun exposure: Still a burning issue. Int. J. Cancer 2007, 121, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Henrikson, N.B.; Morrison, C.C.; Blasi, P.R.; Nguyen, M.; Shibuya, K.C.; Patnode, C.D. Behavioral counseling for skin cancer prevention: Evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA 2018, 319, 1143–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Iannacone, M.R.; Hughes, M.C.; Green, A.C. Effects of sunscreen on skin cancer and photoaging. Photodermatol. Photoimmunol. Photomed. 2014, 30, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Green, A.; Battistutta, D.; Hart, V.; Leslie, D.; Marks, G.; Williams, G.; Gaffney, P.; Parsons, P.; Hirst, L.; Frost, C.; et al. The Nambour skin cancer and actinic eye disease prevention trial: Design and baseline characteristics of participants. Control. Clin. Trials 1994, 15, 512–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chen, J.T.; Kempton, S.J.; Rao, V.K. The economics of skin cancer: An analysis of Medicare payment data. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. Glob. Open 2016, 4, e868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kudish, A.I.; Harari, M.; Evseev, E.G. The solar ultraviolet B radiation protection provided by shading devices with regard to its diffuse component. Photodermatol. Photoimmunol. Photomed. 2011, 27, 236–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gambichler, T.; Altmeyer, P.; Hoffmann, K. Role of clothes in sun protection. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2002, 160, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Abroms, L.; Jorgensen, C.M.; Southwell, B.G.; Geller, A.C.; Emmons, K.M. Gender differences in young adults’ beliefs about sunscreen use. Health Educ. Behav. 2003, 30, 29–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sunscreen Use among Adults in the U.S. 2020. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/sunscreen-use.htm (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  48. Haluza, D.; Moshammer, H.; Kundi, M.; Cervinka, R. Public (Skin) health perspectives of gender differences in tanning habits and sun protective behaviour: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Wien. Klin. Wochenschr. 2015, 127, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Rebar, A.L.; Hamilton, K.; Rhodes, R.E.; Gardner, B. Habit facilitates actioning sun protective behavior intentions. Behav. Med. 2021, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Rothman, A.J.; Sheeran, P.; Wood, W. Reflective and automatic processes in the initiation and maintenance of dietary change. Ann. Behav. Med. 2009, 38 (Suppl. S1), S4–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Conway, M.; Dubé, L. Humor in persuasion on threatening topics: Effectiveness is a function of audience sex role orientation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2002, 28, 863–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Millar, M.G.; Houska, J.A. Masculinity and intentions to perform health behaviors: The effectiveness of fear control arguments. J. Behav. Med. 2007, 30, 403–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Briley, J.J., Jr.; Lynfield, Y.L.; Chavda, K. Sunscreen use and usefulness in African-Americans. J. Drugs Dermatol. 2007, 6, 19–22. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17373157 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  54. Pichon, L.C.; Corral, I.; Landrine, H.; Mayer, J.A.; Norman, G.J. Sun-protection behaviors among African Americans. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2010, 38, 288–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Higgins, S.; Nazemi, A.; Chow, M.; Wysong, A. Review of nonmelanoma skin cancer in african americans, hispanics, and asians. Dermatol. Surg. 2018, 44, 903–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Kailas, A.; Botwin, A.L.; Pritchett, E.N.; Jackson-Richards, D.; Lewis, S.; Sadhwani, D.; Desai, S.R.; Taylor, S.C. Assessing the effectiveness of knowledge-based interventions in increasing skin cancer awareness, knowledge, and protective behaviors in skin of color populations. Cutis 2017, 100, 235–240. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29136057 (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  57. Gloster, H.M., Jr.; Neal, K. Skin cancer in skin of color. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2006, 55, 741–760; quiz 761–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Trompette, J.; Kivits, J.; Minary, L.; Alla, F. Dimensions of the Complexity of Health Interventions: What Are We Talking About? A Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Linos, E.; Keiser, E.; Kanzler, M.; Sainani, K.L.; Lee, W.; Vittinghoff, E.; Chren, M.-M.; Tang, J.Y. Sun protective behaviors and vitamin D levels in the US population: NHANES 2003–2006. Cancer Causes Control. 2012, 23, 133–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Iannacone, M.R.; Wang, W.; Stockwell, H.G.; O’Rourke, K.; Giuliano, A.R.; Sondak, V.K.; Messina, J.L.; Roetzheim, R.G.; Cherpelis, B.S.; Fenske, N.A.; et al. Patterns and timing of sunlight exposure and risk of basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas of the skin—A case-control study. BMC Cancer 2012, 12, 417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Table
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of participants.
VariableAll
N (%)		Had Skin Cancer
N (%)		No Skin Cancer
N (%)		p-Value
Gender, n (%) 0.07
Male2887 (48)89 (55)2476 (48)
Female3105 (52)72 (45)2689 (52)
Race, n (%) <0.001
Mexican American1064 (18)4 (2)953 (18)
Other Hispanic798 (13)8 (5)708 (14)
Non-Hispanic White1914 (32)141 (88)1531 (30)
Non-Hispanic Black1265 (21)3 (2)1125 (22)
Non-Hispanic Asian726 (12)0 (0)667 (13)
Other Race225 (4)5 (3)181 (4)
Educational level, n (%) <0.001
Less than 9th grade688 (12)4 (3)638 (12)
9–11th grade676 (12)29 (20)616 (12)
High school graduate1236 (22)0 (0)1129 (22)
Some college or AA degree1692 (30)62 (42)1501 (29)
College graduate or above1422 (25)51 (35)1278 (25)
Marital status, n (%) <0.001
Married2885 (50)96 (60)2607 (50)
Widowed421 (7)27 (17)324 (6)
Divorced614 (11)21 (13)528 (10)
Separated192 (3)2 (1)165 (3)
Never married1048 (18)9 (6)1006 (19)
Living with partner555 (10)6 (4)533 (10)
Annual household income, n (%) 0.32
$ 0 to 24,9991544 (26)35 (22)1286 (25)
$ 25,000 to 54,9991648 (27)53 (33)1423 (28)
$ 55,000 to 74,999647 (11)16 (10)580 (11)
$ 75,000 to 100,00545 (9)13 (8)488 (9)
$ 100,000 and over955 (16)34 (21)826 (16)
Missing653 (11)10 (6)562 (11)
Table
Table 2. Distribution of skin cancer types in the sample (total N = 161).
Table 2. Distribution of skin cancer types in the sample (total N = 161).
Type of Skin CancerN%
Melanoma 38 23.6
Non-Melanoma 75 46.6
Unknown4829.8
Table
Table 3. Univariate analyses of the effect of preventive measures on skin cancer.
Table 3. Univariate analyses of the effect of preventive measures on skin cancer.
VariablesHas Skin Cancer (n)No Skin Cancer (n)Odds Ratio95% CIp-Value
Sunscreen use177913.7521.784–7.8920.001
Staying in shade1214036.9110.897–53.2460.064
Wearing long-sleeved shirt34970.6460.192–2.1750.481
Table
Table 4. Multivariate logistic regression analyses of the effect of preventive measures on skin cancer.
Table 4. Multivariate logistic regression analyses of the effect of preventive measures on skin cancer.
VariablesOdds Ratio95% CIp-Value
Sunscreen use *0.9560.241–3.7940.949
Staying in shade **---
Wearing long-sleeved shirt *1.1820.298–4.6930.813
Note: * Adjusted for skin reaction to sun after non-exposure, sunburns in past year, age in years at screening, gender, race/Hispanic origin w/NH Asian, marital status, educational level—adults 20+, annual household income, covered by health insurance, and general health condition. ** Unable to compute because of low sample size.
Table
Table 5. Stepwise logistic regressions evaluating incremental value of “staying in shade” and “wearing long-sleeved shirt” to “sunscreen use” (dependent variable = skin cancer).
Table 5. Stepwise logistic regressions evaluating incremental value of “staying in shade” and “wearing long-sleeved shirt” to “sunscreen use” (dependent variable = skin cancer).
VariableOdds Ratio (p-Value)
95% CI
Sunscreen use3.752 (0.001)
[1.784–7.892]		1.174 (0.799)
[0.342–4.037]		3.235 (0.008)
[1.361–7.686]		0.956 (0.949)
[0.241–3.794]
Staying in shade # - -
Wearing long-sleeved shirt 0.610 (0.433)
[0.178–2.096]		1.182 (0.813)
[0.298–4.693]
Note: # Unable to compute due to low sample size.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hung, M.; Beazer, I.R.; Su, S.; Bounsanga, J.; Hon, E.S.; Lipsky, M.S. An Exploration of the Use and Impact of Preventive Measures on Skin Cancer. Healthcare 2022, 10, 743. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10040743

AMA Style

Hung M, Beazer IR, Su S, Bounsanga J, Hon ES, Lipsky MS. An Exploration of the Use and Impact of Preventive Measures on Skin Cancer. Healthcare. 2022; 10(4):743. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10040743

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hung, Man, Isaac Rex Beazer, Sharon Su, Jerry Bounsanga, Eric S. Hon, and Martin S. Lipsky. 2022. "An Exploration of the Use and Impact of Preventive Measures on Skin Cancer" Healthcare 10, no. 4: 743. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10040743

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop