Sunscreen compliance with regional clinical practice guidelines and product labeling standards in New Zealand
Matthias E. Sporer 1 , Joanna E. Mathy 2 , John Kenealy 1 , Jon A. Mathy 1 3 41 Auckland Regional Plastic, Reconstructive & Hand Surgery Unit, Auckland, New Zealand
2 School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
3 University of Auckland School of Medicine, Auckland, New Zealand
4 Correspondence to: Jon A. Mathy, Auckland Regional Plastic, Reconstructive & Hand Surgery Unit, Private Bag 93311, Otahuhu, Auckland 1640, New Zealand. Email: Jon.Mathy@Middlemore.co.nz
Journal of Primary Health Care 8(1) 30-34 https://doi.org/10.1071/HC15019
Published: 31 March 2016
Journal Compilation © Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners 2016.
This is an open access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For general practitioners, practice nurses and community pharmacists in New Zealand, a core duty is to educate patients about sun protection. We aimed to evaluate compliance of locally available sunscreens with regional clinical practice guidelines and sunscreen labelling standards, to assist clinicians in advising consumers on sunscreen selection.
METHODS: We audited all sunscreens available at two Auckland stores for three New Zealand sunscreen retailers. We then assessed compliance with accepted regional clinical practice guidelines for sun protection from the New Zealand Guidelines Group. We further assessed compliance with regional Australia/New Zealand consumer standards for sunscreen labelling.
RESULTS: All sunscreens satisfied clinical guidelines for broad-spectrum protection, and 99% of sunscreens met or exceeded clinical guidelines for minimal Sun Protection Factor. Compliance with regional standardized labelling guidelines is voluntary in New Zealand and 27% of audited sunscreens were not fully compliant with SPF labelling standards.
DISCUSSION: Sunscreens were generally compliant with clinical guidelines for minimal sun protection. However there was substantial noncompliance with regional recommendations for standardized sunscreen labelling. Primary health care clinicians should be aware that this labelling noncompliance may mislead patients into thinking some sunscreens offer more sun protection than they do. Mandatory compliance with the latest regional labelling standards would simplify sunscreen selection by New Zealand consumers.
KEYWORDS: Sunscreen; Sun Protection Factor; SPF; Skin Neoplasms; Melanoma; Skin Cancer Prevention
References
[1] O’Dea D. The costs of skin cancer to New Zealand [Internet]. Wellington: Cancer Society of New Zealand; 2009 [cited 2015 Aug 1]. Available from: https://cancernz.org.nz/assets/Sunsmart/Information-sheets/CostsofSkinCancer-NZ-22October2009.pdf.[2] New Zealand Ministry of Health. Cancer: New registrations and deaths 2011 [Internet]. Wellington: Ministry of Health; 2014 [cited 2015 Aug 1]. Available from: http://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/publications/cancer-new-registrations-deaths-2011-v4sept14.pdf.
[3] van der Pols JC, Williams GM, Pandeya N, Logan V, Green AC. Prolonged prevention of squamous cell carcinoma of the skin by regular sunscreen use. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15 2546–8.
| Prolonged prevention of squamous cell carcinoma of the skin by regular sunscreen use.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 17132769PubMed |
[4] Diffey BL. Sunscreens as a preventative measure in melanoma: an evidence-based approach or the precautionary principle? Br J Dermatol 2009; 161 25–7.
| Sunscreens as a preventative measure in melanoma: an evidence-based approach or the precautionary principle?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 19775353PubMed |
[5] Green AC, Williams GM, Logan V, Strutton GM. Reduced melanoma after regular sunscreen use: randomized trial follow-up. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29 257–63.
| Reduced melanoma after regular sunscreen use: randomized trial follow-up.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXit1yhtbY%3D&md5=2347f8d359600e96b4dbb819ea1c2d49CAS | 21135266PubMed |
[6] Thompson SC, Jolley D, Marks R. Reduction of solar keratoses by regular sunscreen use. N Engl J Med 1993; 329 1147–51.
| Reduction of solar keratoses by regular sunscreen use.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK3szptVGlsw%3D%3D&md5=9f83d809031e4f6f9d67dda61c90b2f1CAS | 8377777PubMed |
[7] Falk M, Magnusson H. Sun protection advice mediated by the general practitioner: an effective way to achieve long-term change of behaviour and attitudes related to sun exposure? Scand J Prim Health Care 2011; 29 135–43.
| Sun protection advice mediated by the general practitioner: an effective way to achieve long-term change of behaviour and attitudes related to sun exposure?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21682578PubMed |
[8] Bens G. Suncreens. Adv Exp Med Biol 2014; 810 429–63.
| 25207381PubMed |
[9] Maslin DL. Do sunscreens protect us? Int J Dermatol 2014; 53 1319–23.
| Do sunscreens protect us?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25208462PubMed |
[10] Goodsell DS. The molecular perspective: ultraviolet light and pyrimidine dimers. Oncologist 2001; 6 298–9.
| The molecular perspective: ultraviolet light and pyrimidine dimers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mzmt12guw%3D%3D&md5=7c35d8612d122d5177a803dee10b06c2CAS | 11423677PubMed |
[11] Elwood JM, Lee JA, Walter SD, Mo T, Green AE. Relationship of melanoma and other skin cancer mortality to latitude and ultraviolet radiation in the United States and Canada. Int J Epidemiol 1974; 3 325–32.
| Relationship of melanoma and other skin cancer mortality to latitude and ultraviolet radiation in the United States and Canada.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaE2M%2FlvFKksg%3D%3D&md5=df363d040b8d873ae027b7cfc78bd1edCAS | 4435983PubMed |
[12] Gallagher RP, Hill GB, Bajdik CD, Coldman AJ, Fincham S, McLean DI, et al. Sunlight exposure, pigmentation factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer. II. Squamous cell carcinoma. Arch Dermatol 1995; 131 164–9.
| Sunlight exposure, pigmentation factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer. II. Squamous cell carcinoma.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK2M7mtVGisA%3D%3D&md5=57f5ae1927a4ed12c37b785e5615a0cbCAS | 7857112PubMed |
[13] Wang SQ, Setlow R, Berwick M, Polsky D, Marghoob AA, Kopf AW, et al. Ultraviolet A and melanoma: a review. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001; 44 837–46.
| Ultraviolet A and melanoma: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M3it1aiug%3D%3D&md5=3b120017d1d71090547fb13b104f0eb5CAS | 11312434PubMed |
[14] Australian Cancer Network Melanoma Guidelines Revision Working Party. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of melanoma in Australia and New Zealand. The Cancer Council Australia and Australian Cancer Network, Sydney and New Zealand Guidelines Group, Wellington; 2008. Available from: http://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/publications/melanoma-guideline-nov08-v2.pdf.
[15] Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration. Australian regulatory guidelines for sunscreens [Internet]. Australian Captial Territory: Therapeutic Goods Administration; 2012 [cited 2015 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.tga.gov.au/publication/australian-regulatory-guidelines-sunscreens-args.
[16] Consumer.org.nz. [Internet]. Wellington: Consumer NZ; c2014–15 [updated 2014 Dec 5; cited 2015 Aug 1]. Sunscreens; [about 16 screens]. Available from: https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles/sunscreens.
