First evaluation of the Behavioral Addiction Indoor Tanning Screener (BAITS) in a nationwide representative sample

Association of Indoor Tanning Regulations With Health and Economic Outcomes in North America and Europe

Importance

UV radiation emissions from indoor tanning devices are carcinogenic. Regulatory actions may be associated with reduced exposure of UV radiation at a population level.

Objective

To estimate the long-term health and economic consequences of banning indoor tanning devices or prohibiting their use by minors only in North America and Europe compared with ongoing current levels of use.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic analysis modeled data for individuals 12 to 35 years old in North America and Europe, who commonly engage in indoor tanning. A Markov cohort model was used with outcomes projected during the cohort's remaining life-years. Models were populated by extracting data from high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses, epidemiologic reports, and cancer registrations.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Main outcomes were numbers of melanomas and deaths from melanoma, numbers of keratinocyte carcinomas, life-years, and health care and productivity costs. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the stability of results.

Results

In an estimated population of 110 932 523 in the United States and Canada and 141 970 492 in Europe, for the next generation of youths and young adults during their remaining lifespans, regulatory actions that ban indoor tanning devices could be expected to gain 423 000 life-years, avert 240 000 melanomas (-8.2%), and avert 7.3 million keratinocyte carcinomas (-7.8%) in North America and gain 460 000 life-years, avert 204 000 melanomas (-4.9%), and avert 2.4 million keratinocyte carcinomas (-4.4%) in Europe compared with ongoing current levels of use. Economic cost savings of US $31.1 billion in North America and €21.1 billion (US $15.9 billion) in Europe could occur. Skin cancers averted and cost savings after prohibiting indoor tanning by minors may be associated with one-third of the corresponding benefits of a total ban.

Conclusions and Relevance

Banning indoor tanning may be associated with reduced skin cancer burden and health care costs. Corresponding gains from prohibiting indoor tanning by minors only may be smaller.

Indoor tanning prevalence after the International Agency for Research on Cancer statement on carcinogenicity of artificial tanning devices: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Exposure to artificial tanning devices is carcinogenic to humans, and government regulations to restrict or ban indoor tanning appear to be increasing.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated changes in the international prevalence of indoor tanning among adolescents and adults after artificial tanning devices were classified as carcinogenic by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2009.

METHODS

Systematic searches in PubMed and Web of Science databases were undertaken. Overall, 43 studies reporting 'ever' or 'past-year' indoor tanning exposure after 2009 were identified. We used metaregression analysis to evaluate the prevalence of indoor tanning over time. Random effects meta-analysis was used to summarize the prevalence of indoor tanning in adolescents and adults according to sex, region and presence of age prohibitions.

RESULTS

Global prevalence of indoor tanning in adolescents for 2013-2018 was 6·5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3·3-10·6], 70% lower than the 22·0% (95% CI 17·2-26·8) prevalence for 2007-2012. Among adults, the prevalence was 10·4% (95% CI 5·7-16·3) for 2013-2018, a decrease of 35% from 18·2% for 2007-2012. Since 2009, the overall past-year prevalence among adolescents was 6·7% (95% CI 4·4-9·6) and 12·5% (95% CI 9·5-15·6) among adults. The prevalence of tanning indoors in the past year was similar in North America (adults, 12·5%; adolescents, 7·6%) and Europe (adults, 11·1%; adolescents, 5·1%). In 2009, three countries had regulations restricting indoor tanning, compared with 26 countries today.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of indoor tanning has declined substantially and significantly in adolescents and adults since the 2009 IARC statement, reflecting the rise in regulations that limit this source of unnecessary exposure to carcinogenic ultraviolet radiation. What is already known about this topic? Indoor tanning is associated with an increased risk of melanoma. A meta-analysis of worldwide indoor tanning prevalence for 1986-2012 found a past-year prevalence of 18% in adolescents and 14% in adults, with higher prevalences during the period 2007-2012. Policies to regulate indoor tanning began to be implemented across the globe in 2009. Only one study carried out in the U.S.A. has evaluated the efficacy of such policies in reducing indoor tanning prevalence. What does this study add? For the period 2013-2018, we found indoor tanning prevalences of 6·7% in adolescents and 11·9% in adults. This implies a reduction in indoor tanning use of 70% in adolescents and 35% in adults during the last 10 years. Our study encourages policy makers to strengthen indoor tanning regulations that reduce sunbed use among the general population in order to produce maximum public health benefit.

Tanning dependence and seasonal affective disorder are frequent among sunbathers but are not associated

Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is a known risk factor for skin cancers. Those who are tanning dependent seek out UVR exposure. Many tanners have expressed symptoms of seasonal affective disorder (SAD), but conclusive evidence of a connection with tanning dependence is lacking. We evaluated the frequency of tanning dependence or abuse and symptoms of SAD among Finnish sunbathers and analysed whether phenomena are associated which could indicate a common biological mechanism. Sunbathing related tanning dependence/abuse among Finnish sunbathers were assessed using the Structured Interview for Tanning Abuse and Dependence measure (SITAD), and symptoms of SAD were assessed with the Seasonal Pattern Assessment Questionnaire (SPAQ). Of 229 sunbathers, 8% (n = 18) were classified as tanning-dependent, and 26% (n = 59) were classified as tanning abusers. Additionally, 16% (n = 37) met the criteria for SAD, and 26% (n = 60) met the criteria for subsyndromal seasonal affective disorder (S-SAD), but there was no significant association between tanning dependence or abuse and SAD or S-SAD. Sunbathing dependence or abuse and SAD/S-SAD were frequent among sunbathers, and they may promote sun-seeking risk behaviour. However, within this sample, tanning dependence and SAD/S-SAD were not associated.

Profile of sunless tanning product users: Results from a nationwide representative survey

BACKGROUND

Sunless tanning products (STPs) are often seen as "healthy alternative" to sunbathing and indoor tanning. However, STP use may entail indirect risks such as overestimating an individual's natural skin type, resulting in risky (natural and artificial) tanning behavior. We aimed to explore STP use in combination with other health-related risk behaviors (eg, smoking), skin cancer risk, risk awareness of ultraviolet radiation, and preventive behavior.

METHODS

We used data from the NCAM, a nationwide representative cross-sectional sample (n = 3000, aged 14-45, 48.6% female) interviewed via telephone. Differences between STP users and nonusers regarding the abovementioned aspects were identified using chi²-test.

RESULTS

The 1-year prevalence of STP use was 7.5%. Tanning bed users showed a higher prevalence of STP use than past and never users (16.1% vs 9.6% vs 5.8%, P < 0.05). Although STP users had a higher skin cancer risk based on individual characteristics, they were less likely to have participated in a skin cancer screen.

CONCLUSION

The identified parallel use of STPs and tanning beds can have severe health consequences, since the "fake tan" of STPs may lead to an overestimation of the individual's skin type, which may result in overdosed UV exposure. The lower risk awareness among STP users accompanied with their higher skin cancer risk calls for target group-specific prevention.