An Analysis of Dermatology-Related Red-Light Therapy Patient Questions on Reddit

BACKGROUND

Reddit is one of the world's most popular social media platforms and is increasingly used as a health information resource for patients on topics such as red-light (RL) therapy.

OBJECTIVE

In this article, the authors present an analysis of prevalent patient questions and concerns regarding RL therapy.

METHODS

All posts on the "Hot" page of the r/redlighttherapy subreddit were analyzed and categorized.

RESULTS

A total of 930 questions from 664 posts were analyzed. The most commonly asked question category was related to product recommendations or feedback (29.7%), followed by usage instructions (15.3%), safety and side effects (12.6%), and indications and efficacy (12.3%).

CONCLUSION

Understanding patient concerns and questions about RL, as expressed on online platforms like Reddit, can help clinicians improve patient satisfaction, education, and clinical outcomes. The study offers an innovative approach by using social media to uncover valuable patient insights that might not be easily observable within clinical settings.

Unlocking the Power of Light on the Skin: A Comprehensive Review on Photobiomodulation

Photobiomodulation (PBM) is a procedure that uses light to modulate cellular functions and biological processes. Over the past decades, PBM has gained considerable attention for its potential in various medical applications due to its non-invasive nature and minimal side effects. We conducted a narrative review including articles about photobiomodulation, LED light therapy or low-level laser therapy and their applications on dermatology published over the last 6 years, encompassing research studies, clinical trials, and technological developments. This review highlights the mechanisms of action underlying PBM, including the interaction with cellular chromophores and the activation of intracellular signaling pathways. The evidence from clinical trials and experimental studies to evaluate the efficacy of PBM in clinical practice is summarized with a special emphasis on dermatology. Furthermore, advancements in PBM technology, such as novel light sources and treatment protocols, are discussed in the context of optimizing therapeutic outcomes and improving patient care. This narrative review underscores the promising role of PBM as a non-invasive therapeutic approach with broad clinical applicability. Despite the need for further research to develop standard protocols, PBM holds great potential for addressing a wide range of medical conditions and enhancing patient outcomes in modern healthcare practice.

Photobiomodulation CME part II: Clinical applications in dermatology

Photobiomodulation (PBM) is an emerging treatment modality in dermatology with increasing office and home-based use. PBM is the use of various light sources in the red light (620-700 nm) and near-infrared (700-1440 nm) spectrum as a form of light therapy. PBM is often administered through low-level lasers or light-emitting diodes. Studies show that PBM can be used effectively to treat conditions secondary to cancer therapies, alopecia, ulcers, herpes simplex virus, acne, skin rejuvenation, wounds, and scars. PBM offers patients many benefits compared to other treatments. It is noninvasive, cost-effective, convenient for patients, and offers a favorable safety profile. PBM can be used as an alternative or adjuvant to other treatment modalities including pharmacotherapy. It is important for dermatologists to gain a better clinical understanding of PBM for in-office administration and to counsel patients on proper application for home-use devices to best manage safety and expectations as this technology develops. PBM wavelengths can induce varied biological effects in diverse skin types, races, and ethnicities; therefore, it is also important for dermatologists to properly counsel their skin of color patients who undergo PBM treatments. Future clinical trials are necessary to produce standardized recommendations across conditions and skin types.

Cutaneous interaction with visible light: What do we know?

Visible light has been used therapeutically in dermatology for years for a variety of cosmetic and medical indications, including skin rejuvenation and the treatment of inflammatory and neoplastic conditions, among others. Until recently, visible light was thought to be relatively inert compared to its spectral neighbors, ultraviolet and infrared radiation. However, recent literature has described the ability of visible light to cause erythema in light skin and pigmentary changes in individuals with darker skin types. Concern surrounding its potentially damaging cutaneous effects has been raised in both the medical community and social media outlets. In this article, we provide an evidenced-based review describing what is currently known about visible light, focusing on its role in dermatologic diseases including disorders of hyperpigmentation such as melasma and postinflammatory hyperpigmentation.

An objective skin-type classification based on non-invasive biophysical parameters

BACKGROUND

Despite the invention of various non-invasive bioengineering tools, skin-type analysis has largely been based on subjective assessments. However, advancements in the functional cosmetic industry and artificial intelligence-assisted dermatology are creating a greater demand for an objective skin-type classification system.

OBJECTIVES

To propose an objective skin-type classification system solely based on non-invasive, bioengineering devices; provide reference values applicable to the Korean population; and compare our reference values with those of published studies.

METHODS

Biophysical parameter measurements were obtained from the 2018 International Skin Characteristics Data Bank Project conducted by the Foundation of Korea Cosmetic Industry Institute. The participants were 434 healthy South Korean adults. Each participant was assessed using eight bioengineering devices (Tewameter^® , pH-meter^® , Corneometer^® , Sebumeter^® , Cutometer^® , Spectrophotometer^® , PRIMOS^® lite, and Janus^® ). The measurements were divided into tertiles to determine reference points.

RESULTS

Our objective skin-type classification consists of five main categories (sensitivity, hydration, oiliness, elasticity, and skin tone) and five corresponding subcategories (erythema, roughness, pores, wrinkles, and pigmentation, respectively). Each skin type was assigned based on the reference point of the biophysical parameter, which was established as the tertile value associated with 'unfavourable' skin characteristics. Individuals were categorized as having sensitive skin when the TEWL scores were over 18.0 g/m² /h or the pH was over 5.45; dehydrated skin when the corneometric value measured below 47.17 A.U.; oily skin when the sebumetric value exceeded 70 μg/cm² ; and loose skin when the cutometric R² value was below 0.68 E/mm.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to provide a comprehensive skin-type classification system based solely on non-invasive biophysical parameters. As measurement data accumulate, the reference points will progress to become more accurate, and they will be subdivided according to gender, age, and ethnic group. Therefore, our classification system serves as a basis for artificial intelligence-based skin-type analysis.

Narrow Band Ultraviolet B Versus Red Light-Emitting Diodes in the Treatment of Facial Acne Vulgaris: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: One of the most common dermatological conditions affecting most teenagers is acne. Phototherapy was described as a therapeutic modality with low-side effects of acne vulgaris (AV). Hence, we examined the effects of narrow band ultraviolet B (NBUVB) versus red light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on facial AV. Methods: Forty-five subjects suffering from facial AV mild to a moderate degree were randomly assigned into three groups, 15 subjects within every group. Group A was equipped to NBUVB with 311-313 nm and an initial dose of 250 mJ/cm², thrice a week for 8 weeks, Group B was equipped red LED with wavelengths 633 ± 6 nm and power density of 80 mW/cm², thrice a week for 8 weeks, whereas group C had received the only erythromycin as a control group. Outcome measures included measurement of acne lesion count and degree of severity. Measures at three-time intervals were assessed: baseline, 4 weeks (post I), and 8 weeks (post II). Results: Acne numeral findings revealed a significant variance among groups A, B, and C in favor of group A (p < 0.001). Notable improvements were observed across all three groups (p < 0.001). The degree of adjustment effects indicated a greater increase in group A in comparison with group B (p < 0.01), whereas no statistical variance was detected between group B and group C (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Both NBUVB and red LED were effective in acne treatment; NBUVB, however, revealed a highly efficient treatment than red LED in decreasing the acne lesions count and the improved degree of AV severity as measured by the global investigator's assessment scale. Clinical Trial Registration No. NCT04254601.

Guidelines of care for the management of acne vulgaris

Acne is one of the most common disorders treated by dermatologists and other health care providers. While it most often affects adolescents, it is not uncommon in adults and can also be seen in children. This evidence-based guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in its management. Issues from grading of acne to the topical and systemic management of the disease are reviewed. Suggestions on use are provided based on available evidence.

Comparison of Red and Infrared Low-level Laser Therapy in the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Acne vulgaris is a very prevalent skin disorder and remains a main problem in practice. Recently, phototherapy with various light spectrums for acne has been used. There are some evidences that low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has beneficial effect in the treatment of acne lesions. In this study, two different wavelengths of LLLT (630 and 890 nm) were evaluated in treatment of acne vulgaris.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Patients with mild to moderate acne vulgaris and age above 18 years and included were treated with red LLLT (630 nm) and infrared LLLT (890 nm) on the right and left sides of the face respectively, twice in a week for 12 sessions, and clinically assessed at baseline and weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were participated in this study. Ten weeks after treatment acne lesion were significantly decreased in the side treated by 630 nm LLLT (27.7±12.7 to 6.3±1.9) (P<0.001), but this decrease was not significant in the site treated by 890 nm LLLT (26.9±12.4 to 22.2±8.5) (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Red wavelength is safe and effective to be used to treat acne vulgaris by LLLT compared to infrared wavelength.

New approaches in light/laser therapies and photodynamic treatment of acne

Acne is a domain in which the technology and understanding of light/laser therapeutic procedures have advanced considerably. The aim of the paper was to revisit adjunctive physical treatments of acne, including light/laser treatments and photodynamic therapy. This review summarizes findings about such treatment modalities with particular emphasis on efficacy and safety. A number of laser/light-based modalities have been developed to meet the increasing demand for new acne treatments. The current devices correspond, on the one hand, to light-emitting diode therapy and, on the other hand, to the 532-nm potassium titanyl phosphate laser, the 585- and 595-nm pulsed dye laser, the 1450-nm diode laser, the 1320-nm Nd:YAG laser and intense pulsed light. Photodynamic therapy is also available. It is claimed that light/laser treatments might induce a faster response compared with the 1-3 months needed for response to traditional oral and topical treatments. In conclusion, pulsed dye laser shows efficacy in some patients with mild to moderate acne. The relative effectiveness compared with other treatments is unconfirmed; from the published information, evidence-based efficacy assessment of light/laser therapies in acne remains almost impossible.