Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptions of Sensitive Skin with Age

  • Reference work entry
Textbook of Aging Skin

Abstract

In the general population, little correlation exists between individuals’ perceptions of the sensitivity of their skin and objective clinical assessments of skin reactivity to irritants [1]. Individuals who exhibit a low threshold of response to a particular irritant may not be susceptible to all other types of irritant stimuli. Nevertheless, a sizeable proportion of people in the general population claim some degree of skin sensitivity. In the UK, for example, a survey of 2,058 men and women found that 38.2% of the men and 51.4% of the women claimed to have sensitive skin [2]. A phone survey conducted in San Francisco among 800 ethnically diverse women aged 18–54 years found that 52% considered themselves to have sensitive facial skin [3]. In two seasonal surveys conducted in France (one in winter among 1,006 individuals and one in summer among 1,001 individuals), 51.7% of the respondents from the winter survey (March) and 58.9% from the summer survey (July) considered their skin to be either sensitive or very sensitive [4, 5].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 499.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Marriott MC, Basketter DA, Cooper KJ. The complex problem of sensitive skin. In: Berardesca E, Fluhr JW, Maibach HI (eds) Sensitive Skin Syndrome. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2006, pp. 61–65.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Willis CM, Shaw S, DeLacharriere O, Baverel M, Reiche L, Jourdain R, Bastien P, Wilkinson JD. Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. Br J Dermatol. 2001;145:258–263.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jourdain R, Lacharriere O, Bastien P, Maibach HI. Ethnic variations in self-perceived sensitive skin: epidemiological survey. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:162–169.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Consoli S, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin: epidemiological approach and impact on quality of life in France. In: Berardesca E, Fluhr JW, Maibach HI (eds) Sensitive Skin Syndrome. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2006, pp. 81–191.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Consoli S, Boussetta S, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin: psychological effects and seasonal changes. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2007;21(5):620–628.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Farage MA. How do perceptions of sensitive skin differ at different anatomical sites? An epidemiological study. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2009;34(7)-Doi:10.1111/j.1365-2230.2009.03487.x

    Google Scholar 

  7. Farage MA. Perceptions of sensitive skin: changes in perceived severity and associations with environmental causes. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;59:226–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Farage MA, Miller KW, Elsner P, Maibach HI. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in skin ageing: a review. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2008;30(2):87–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Runeman B. Skin interaction with absorbent hygiene products. Clin Dermatol. 2008;26:45–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Robinson MK. Age and gender as influencing factors in skin sensitivity. In: Berardesca E, Fluhr JW, Maibach HI (eds) Sensitive Skin Syndrome. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2006, pp. 169–180.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Robinson MK. Population differences in acute skin irritation responses – race, sex, age, sensitive skin and repeat subject comparisons. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:86–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lejman E, Stoudemayer T, Grove G, Kligman AM. Age differences in poison ivy dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1984;11:63–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cua AB, Wilhelm KP, Maibach HI. Cutaneous sodium lauryl sulphate irritation potential: age and regional variability. Br J Dermatol. 1990;123(5):607–613.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Grove GL, Duncan S, Kligman AM. Effects of ageing on the blistering of human skin with ammonium hydrozide. Br J Dermatol. 1982;107:393–400.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Farage MA. Perception of sensitive skin: women with urinary incontinence. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;280(1):49–57. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0870-6.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Census 2000 Data for the State of Ohio, General demographic characteristics (Accessed 22 March 2007), http://www.census.gov/census2000/states/oh.html

  17. Loffler H, Dickel H, Kuss O, Diepgen TL, Effendy I. Characteristics of self-estimated enhanced skin susceptibility. Acta Dermatol Venereol. 2001;81:343–346.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Farage MA. Self-reported immunologic and familial links in individuals who perceive they have sensitive skin. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159:237–238.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Brown JS, Grady D, Ouslander JG, Herzog AR, Varner RE, Posner SF. Prevalence of urinary incontinence and associated risk factors in postmenopausal women. Heart & Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) Research Group. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94:66–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hagglund D, Olsson H, Leppert J. Urinary incontinence: an unexpected large problem among young females. Results from a population-based study. Fam Pract. 1999;16(5):506–509.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jolleys JV. Reported prevalence of urinary incontinence in women in a general practice. Br Med J. 1988;296:1300–1302.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Thomas TM, Plymat KR, Blannin J, Meade TW. Prevalence of urinary incontinence. Br Med J. 1980;281:1243–1245.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Roberts RO, Jacobsen SJ, Reilly WT, Pemberton JH, Lieber MM, Talley NJ. Prevalence of combined fecal and urinary incontinence: a community-based study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47:837–841.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Procter & Gamble Company Winton Hill Business Center, 6110 Center Hill Road, Box 136, Cincinnati, 45224, Ohio, USA

    Miranda A. Farage

Authors
  1. Miranda A. Farage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Procter & Gamble Company, 6110 Center Hill Avenue, 45224, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Miranda A. Farage Ph.D. (Principal Scientist) (Principal Scientist)

  2. The Procter & Gamble Company, 6110 Center Hill Avenue, 45224, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Kenneth W. Miller Ph.D. (Associate Director) (Associate Director)

  3. Department of Dermatology, University of California, School of Medicine, 222 SE 8th Ave., Suite 563, 94122, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Howard I. Maibach M.D. (Professor) (Professor)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this entry

Cite this entry

Farage, M.A. (2010). Perceptions of Sensitive Skin with Age. In: Farage, M.A., Miller, K.W., Maibach, H.I. (eds) Textbook of Aging Skin. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89656-2_95

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89656-2_95

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-89655-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-89656-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation