Descriptive analysis reveals adverse cosmetic events among urban and rural users, suggesting critical need for a national cosmetovigilance system.
BACKGROUND: The survey was designed to assess both the prevalence, characteristics of adverse cosmetic events reported by customers and actions taken in response to these ACEs events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study utilized a questionnaire comprising five sections, covering demographics, safety practices in cosmetic use, behavior patterns, types and frequencies of effects, and consultation preferences. Logistic regression analysis was employed to determine odds ratios for various factors. RESULTS: A total of 988 respondent’s where 71% of respondents belong to urban areas, 71%; while 29% belong to rural areas. Significant differences were found regarding changing the cosmetic brand frequently ( P = 0.008). Statistically significant differences ( P = 0.000) were found in cosmetic use behavior in males and females, and in urban and rural areas. Statistically significant variations ( P < 0.001) were observed in females and male, residing in both rural and urban areas, regarding cutaneous adverse events, systemic adverse events, their management, and the type of opted consultation. CONCLUSION: Most of the participants experience ADRs according to the current survey. Therefore, it shows the need for cosmetovigilance system nationwide, which helps in resolving the issues of cosmetics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ilyas et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: