Study Links Social Media Cosmetic Trends to Skin Damage and Increased Acne Severity

During the assessment, dermatologists evaluated acne severity and skin barrier damage while patients disclosed their social media habits, cosmetic usage, and reasons for any delays in seeking medical care. Notably, 28.2% of participants reported buying skincare products influenced by social media, with 34.1% indicating that these recommendations postponed their medical consultations.

Barrier damage was observed in 25.5% of the study group. Among those who purchased products based on social media influences, 64.3% exhibited barrier damage compared to just 10.2% of non-purchasers. The incidence of barrier damage increased with the number of products used: 20.4% for those using 1 to 2 products, 64.0% for 3 to 5 products, and 77.8% for more than 5.

Multivariate analysis showed that delayed consultations, the number of products used, and purchases driven by social media were independent risk factors for barrier damage. Specifically, delayed medical consultation increased the odds of barrier damage more than sixfold (OR, 6.65), while each additional category of product usage raised the risk (OR, 3.94). Social media-driven purchases had an independent association with barrier damage (OR, 3.25).

The study also revealed that delayed care correlated with more severe acne. In the severe-acne model, delayed consultation was linked to a 3.03 odds ratio for severe acne, with barrier damage showing an odds ratio of 2.54. Among those who purchased via social media, 41.7% had severe acne, compared to 18.1% of non-purchasers.

Differences were noted among users of various social media platforms. TikTok users reported higher rates of product purchases (58.7% vs. 40.4% for Instagram) and delayed medical consultations (66.7% vs. 49.0%). Additionally, TikTok users showed a greater mean severity score for acne (2.31 vs. 2.03).

The type of accounts followed also influenced outcomes. Patients following only influencers showed higher barrier damage rates (53.0%) and more severe acne (42.6%) compared to those following only dermatologists (8.3% for barrier damage and 12.2% for severe acne).

Interestingly, patients familiar with more dermocosmetic terminology had higher purchasing rates and instances of barrier damage and delayed consultations. However, due to the study's cross-sectional nature, these associations do not imply causation.

The authors suggest that dermatologists should take into account patients' sources of information on social media and their cosmetic usage habits when evaluating acne cases. They advocate for improved evidence-based dermatology content on social media platforms, particularly as many current recommendations come from unqualified individuals. They conclude that engaging with the dermatology community on social media could lead to better patient outcomes and timely access to treatment.