International Consensus on Anti-Aging Dermocosmetics and Skin Care for Clinical Practice Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

Abstract

Background: The objective was to provide international recommendations on anti-aging dermocosmetics for clinical practice starting with essential ingredients for protection and repair before working up to advanced products for specific concerns.  Methods: Seven international experts reviewed 8 hypothetical case scenarios covering different ages, skin issues (eg, sensitivity, acne, melasma), and exposure to exposome factors for both sexes and all Fitzpatrick skin types (FST). The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used to obtain consensus. Seventeen key ingredients were rated on a scale from 1 (totally inappropriate) to 9 (totally appropriate). Statistical analysis, 2 meetings, and email discussions refined the recommendations.

Results: High-factor broad-spectrum sunscreen (ie, protects against ultraviolet [UV] A and B rays), niacinamide, and other topical antioxidants were recommended for all scenarios. Further discussions were required for other ingredients. Tinted sunscreen/iron oxide were recommended for all FST, although compliance may be sub-optimal for darker skin phototypes (IV-VI), if not cosmetically acceptable. Combining a facial foundation with broad-spectrum sunscreen was recommended for darker phototypes to obtain visible light protection closely matching diverse color tones. Retinols were not recommended as a first-line treatment for sensitive skin, especially FST V and VI, due to the risk of irritation. After ablative laser treatment, alpha hydroxy acids should be avoided or used with caution in FST IV to VI due to the risk of post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation.

Conclusion: We describe a simple, practical tool for use in daily dermatology consultations for providing recommendations on anti-aging dermocosmetics to cover diverse and inclusive populations of patients, addressing all skin types and international needs.  J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(1):1337-1343.     doi:10.36849/JDD.7798.