This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (21)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Dermatologic Disorders  • Patient Education/ Health Literacy  • Dermatologic Disorders, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Heike I. M. Mahler, PhD; James A. Kulik, PhD; Jody Harrell, MA; Alma Correa, BA; Frederick X. Gibbons, PhD; Meg Gerrard, PhD

Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:373-380.

Objectives  To examine the efficacy of UV photographs and information about photoaging (eg, wrinkles and age spots) for increasing the sun protection intentions and behaviors of young adults and to determine whether any effects of this appearance-based intervention could be enhanced by providing a non-UV alternative for achieving a tan (ie, sunless tanning lotion).

Design  Randomized control trial with 1-month follow-up.

Setting  Two universities in Southern California.

Participants  A volunteer sample of 146 college students, 91.1% of whom completed the "surprise" 1-month follow-up.

Intervention  A UV facial photograph and a brief videotape describing the causes and consequences of photoaging. The study tested the effects of the photoaging information/UV photographic intervention only, the intervention plus use of sunless tanning lotion, and a control condition.

Main Outcome Measures  Participants sun protection intentions as assessed immediately after the intervention and sun protection behaviors during the month after the intervention as assessed during a surprise telephone follow-up.

Results  The intervention resulted in significantly stronger sun protection intentions (P<.001) and greater sun protection behaviors (P<.05) relative to controls. Furthermore, the group that also used sunless tanning lotion tended to engage in greater sun protection behaviors than the group that received the intervention alone (P<.08).

Conclusion  The UV photographic intervention holds promise as a cost-effective approach to motivate practices that may ultimately result in health benefits (ie, reduced skin cancer rates).

Author Affiliations: University of California, San Diego (Drs Mahler and Kulik and Mss Harrell and Correa); California State University, San Marcos (Dr Mahler and Ms Correa); and Iowa State University, Ames (Drs Gibbons and Gerrard).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Not All Tanners Are Created Equal: Implications of Tanning Subtypes for Skin Cancer Prevention
Pagoto and Hillhouse
Arch Dermatol 2008;144:1505-1508.
FULL TEXT  

Teens and Tans: Implementing Behavioral Change
Haas
Arch Dermatol 2007;143:1058-1061.
FULL TEXT  

Indoor tanning attitudes and practices of US dermatologists compared with other medical specialists.
Johnson et al.
Arch Dermatol 2006;142:465-470.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Translation as a Function of Modality: The Potential of Brief Interventions
Werch et al.
Eval Health Prof 2006;29:89-125.
ABSTRACT  

Behavioral and community interventions to prevent skin cancer: what works?
Glanz et al.
Arch Dermatol 2006;142:356-360.
FULL TEXT  

UV Light Tanning as a Type of Substance-Related Disorder
Warthan et al.
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:963-966.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Sunscreen, Sun Protection, and Our Many Failures
Naylor and Robinson
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:1025-1027.
FULL TEXT  

Awareness of Sun Effects: Do Shock Tactics Work?
Journal Watch Dermatology 2005;2005:3-3.
FULL TEXT