Nationwide Survey and Identification of Potential Stress Factor in Sensitive Skin of Chinese Women

Figures & data

Table 1 Sample Population

Characteristics	N	%
Gender
Female	22,556	97.6%
Male	557	2.4%
Age
18–20	292	1.3%
21–30	2922	12.9%
31–40	3310	14.6%
41–50	5412	23.9%
51–60	5728	25.3%
61–70	4009	17.7%
71–80	947	4.2%
Sensitivity self-declared
Not sensitive at all	11,475	49.6%
Slightly sensitive	9537	41.3%
Very sensitive	1608	7.0%
Not sure	493	2.1%
Total	23,113

Table 2 The Prevalence of Skin Sensitivity in Different Ages

Age Range	Non-Sensitive		Sensitive
	n	%	n	%
18–20	93	35.9%	166	64.1%
21–30	942	34.2%	1815	65.8%
31–40	1376	42.8%	1837	57.2%
41–50	2627	49.2%	2717	50.8%
51–60	3061	54.0%	2604	46.0%
61–70	2394	60.7%	1553	39.3%
71–80	636	70.7%	264	29.3%
Total	11,129	50.4%	10,956	49.6%

Figure 1 Venn diagram of sensitive skin and skin symptoms.

Table 3 Sensitive Skin Prevalence According to the Declaration of Skin Types

Declaration of Skin Type	n	%	Non-Sensitive		Sensitive
			n	%	n	%
Dry skin	9110	41.2%	4937	54.2%	4173	45.8%
Neutral skin	1260	5.7%	741	58.8%	519	41.2%
Combination skin	10,617	48.1%	4954	46.7%	5663	53.3%
Oily skin	957	4.3%	447	46.7%	510	53.3%
Not sure	141	0.6%	50	35.5%	91	64.5%
Total	22,085	100.0%	11,129	50.4%	10,956	49.6%

Table 4 Sensitive Skin Prevalence According to the Geographical Areas

Municipality or Province	Total	Sensitive
		n	%
Shanghai	1187	700	59.0%
Guangdong	692	354	51.2%
Beijing	2433	1207	49.6%
Henan	2066	968	46.9%
Shandong	2276	1054	46.3%
Chongqing	1020	468	45.9%
Sichuan	2678	1124	42.0%
Others	6709	3376	50.3%
NA’s	3024	1705	56.4%
Total	22,085	10,956	49.6%

Figure 2 Logistic regression evaluating predictive factors for the skin sensitivity.

Table 5 Sensitive Skin Prevalence According to the Usage of Cosmetic Product and Life Style

Predictive Variables	Estimate	Standard Error	P-value	Odds Ratio	95% CI
Age	−0.03	0.00	0.001	0.973	0.971–0.975
Skin type
Skin type dry vs neutral	0.28	0.06	0.001	1.328	1.176–1.501
Skin type combination vs neutral	0.36	0.06	0.001	1.437	1.274–1.622
Skin type oily vs neutral	0.14	0.10	0.138	1.153	0.955–1.391
Cosmetic product usage^a
Apply 3 kinds cosmetic product vs less	0.07	0.03	0.017	1.068	1.012–1.128
Make-up frequency
Make-up everyday vs not	0.01	0.05	0.857	1.008	0.923–1.101
Make-up 2–3 times/week vs not	0.16	0.07	0.028	1.177	1.018–1.361
Occasionally make-up vs not	0.11	0.03	0.002	1.111	1.040–1.188
Types of make-up removers
Remover lotion/water vs facial cleanser	−0.07	0.06	0.297	0.937	0.829–1.059
Remover oil/cream vs facial cleanser	0.23	0.09	0.015	1.252	1.046–1.500
Remover wipe vs facial cleanser	0.15	0.12	0.216	1.164	0.915–1.482
Apply 3 kinds removers vs less^b	0.59	0.23	0.009	1.807	1.162–2.8105
Life stress
Mild stress vs no stress	0.27	0.03	0.001	1.305	1.225–1.390
Heavy stress vs no stress	0.45	0.06	0.001	1.574	1.402–1.766
Time to sleep
Sleep at 22:00–24:00 vs before 22:00	0.06	0.06	0.282	1.067	0.948–1.200
Sleep at 24:00–2:00 vs before 22:00	0.10	0.07	0.160	1.108	0.960–1.278
Sleep late than 2:00 am vs before 22:00 pm	0.59	0.22	0.007	1.812	1.173–2.797
Sleep length
Sleep for 6 to 8 hours vs more 8 hours	0.15	0.05	0.004	1.157	1.049–1.276
Sleep less 6 hours vs more 8 hours	0.30	0.07	0.001	1.357	1.194–1.541
Air quality index
AQI >80 vs <80	0.06	0.03	0.034	1.065	1.005–1.129

Notes: ^adifferent kinds of cosmetic products used by subjects, including: exfoliant, facial mask, facial cleanser, sunscreen; ^bdifferent kinds of makeup remover used by subjects, including: makeup remover lotion/water, cleansing oil/cream, makeup remover wipe, facial cleanser.

Table 6 Prevalence of Self-Declared Sensitive Skin in Various Geographies

Countries	Number of Subjects	Prevalence of Sensitivity (%)	Reference
Korea	1000	56.8%	[^Citation27]
Japan	1500	54.5%	[^Citation12]
Italy	500	53.8%	[^Citation13]
France	1006	51.9%	[^Citation15]
China (women)	22,085	49.6%	This study
USA	994	44.6%	[^Citation14]
Russia	1500	39.7%	[^Citation28]
Germany	500	35.6%	[^Citation13]
Brazil	1022	34.2%	[^Citation28]
Spain	500	31.6%	[^Citation13]

Kim YR, Cheon HI, Misery L, Taieb C, Lee YW. Sensitive skin in Korean population: an epidemiological approach. Skin Res Technol. 2018;24(2):229–234. doi:10.1111/srt.1241829067709

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kamide R, Misery L, Perez-Cullell N, Sibaud V, Taieb C. Sensitive skin evaluation in the Japanese population. J Dermatol. 2013;40(3):177–181. doi:10.1111/1346-8138.1202723253054

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Misery L, Boussetta S, Nocera T, Perez-Cullell N, Taieb C. Sensitive skin in Europe. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2009;23(4):376–381. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.2008.03037.x19335729

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Misery L, Jourdan E, Huet F, et al. Sensitive skin in France: a study on prevalence, relationship with age and skin type and impact on quality of life. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32(5):791–795. doi:10.1111/jdv.1483729397030

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Misery L, Sibaud V, Merial‐Kieny C, Taieb C. Sensitive skin in the American population: prevalence, clinical data, and role of the dermatologist. Int J Dermatol. 2011;50(8):961–967. doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.04884.x21781068

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Taieb C, Auges M, Georgescu V, Perez Cullell N, Misery L. Sensitive skin in Brazil and Russia: an epidemiological and comparative approach. Eur J Dermatol. 2014;24(3):372–376. doi:10.1684/ejd.2014.236724899520

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar