4.5 Article

Epidemiology of rosacea in a population-based study of 161,269 German employees

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 61, 期 5, 页码 570-576

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijd.15989

关键词

-

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rosacea is a common chronic skin condition with increasing prevalence with age in Germany. Patients with rosacea have an increased risk for associated comorbidities.
Background Rosacea is a common chronic skin condition, but data on its epidemiology and related comorbidities are scarce. Objectives To analyze the prevalence and associated cutaneous comorbidities of rosacea in Germany. Methods Voluntary dermatological full-body examinations were conducted between 2001 and 2016 in more than 500 German companies by experienced dermatologists and documented electronically. Point-prevalence rates were calculated, and associations were tested with chi-squared tests and logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 161,269 participants (mean age was 43.2 +/- 10.9 years; 55.5% male) were included; 2.1% had rosacea (men: 2.1%, women 2.1%, mean age 50.7 +/- 9.3 years). The prevalence of rosacea increased significantly with age (16-29 years: 0.3%; 30-39 years: 0.9%; 40-49 years: 2.0%; 50-59 years: 3.5%; 60-70 years: 5.7%). Furthermore, there was a significant decreasing prevalence from skin type I toward type IV (skin type I: 3.2%; II: 2.2%; III: 1.5%; IV: 0.4%). The most frequent dermatological comorbidities were: telangiectasia (OR = 2.5), folliculitis (OR = 1.8), seborrheic dermatitis (OR = 1.6), acne (OR = 1.6), tinea pedis (OR = 1.4), psoriasis (OR = 1.4), spider veins (OR = 1.1), and hemangioma (OR = 1.1). Conclusions Rosacea is a common skin condition that is most prevalent above the age of 65 years. Rosacea patients have an increased risk for associated comorbidities. Therefore, the diagnostic and therapeutic process for rosacea patients must ensure an integrated, complete dermatological approach in terms of medical care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据