中华皮肤科杂志 ›› 2012, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (12): 901-902.

• 研究报道 • 上一篇    下一篇

乌鲁木齐地区127例志愿者紫外线最小红斑量测定

丁媛1,向芳2,于世荣1,梁俊琴3,康晓静4,普雄明1   

  1. 1. 新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院皮肤性病科
    2. 新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院 830001；
    3. 新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院皮肤科
    4. 乌鲁木齐市 新疆维吾尔自治区人民医院皮肤科
  • 收稿日期:2012-01-09 修回日期:2012-07-22 出版日期:2012-12-15 发布日期:2012-11-30
  • 通讯作者: 普雄明 E-mail:puxiongming@126.com

Determination of minimal erythema dose of ultraviolet in 127 volunteers from Urumqi region

  • Received:2012-01-09 Revised:2012-07-22 Online:2012-12-15 Published:2012-11-30

PDF

53

赞

摘要：

目的 测定乌鲁木齐地区志愿者长波紫外线（UVA）、中波紫外线（UVB）的最小红斑量（MED）。方法 以SUV-1000型日光紫外线模拟器为光源，测定127例志愿者UVA-MED、UVB-MED。结果 Ⅲ型皮肤48例，UVA-MED中位数为38.10 J/cm2，UVB-MED中位数为31.80 mJ/cm2；Ⅳ型皮肤79例，UVA-MED中位数为59.16 J/cm2，UVB-MED中位数为48.00 mJ/cm2。男性UVA-MED中位数为59.16 mJ/cm2，女性为41.10 J/cm2；男性UVB-MED中位数为39.60 mJ/cm2，女性为35.55 mJ/cm2。男、女性Ⅲ型与Ⅳ型皮肤UVA-MED、UVB-MED中位数差异有统计学意义，Ⅲ型皮肤均显著低于Ⅳ型皮肤。男性UVA-MED显著高于女性（P < 0.05），UVB-MED男女之间差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。Ⅲ型、Ⅳ型皮肤维族与汉族比较，UVA-MED和UVB-MED差异均无统计学意义（P值均 > 0.05），男性、女性在不同年龄组间以及不同户外停留时间组之间差异也无统计学意义（P值均 > 0.05）。通过百分位数法确定UVA-MED的正常值 > 33.38 J/cm2，UVB-MED > 27.90 mJ/cm2。结论 皮肤光反应类型是决定MED的重要因素。

关键词: 乌鲁木齐

Abstract:

Objective To determine the normal range of minimal erythema dose （MED） for ultraviolet A （UVA） and B （UVB） in volunteers from Urumqi region. Methods One hundred and twenty-seven volunteers including healthy subjects and patients with noninflammatory skin disorders were enrolled in this study. SUV-1000 type UV simulator was used as the light source to determine MED of UVA and UVB in these subjects. Results These subjects included 48 persons with Fitzpatrick skin type Ⅲ, 79 with Fitzpatrick skin type Ⅳ, 51 males and 76 females. The median MED value for UVA and UVB was 38.1 J/cm2 and 31.8 mJ/cm2 respectively in subjects with skin type Ⅲ, 59.16 J/cm2 and 48.00 mJ/cm2 respectively in subjects with skin type Ⅳ. Significantly lower median MED values of UVA （both P < 0.01） and UVB （both P < 0.05） were observed in the male and female subjects with skin type Ⅲ compared with those with skin type Ⅳ. The male subjects showed a significantly higher median UVA-MED value （59.16 J/cm2 vs. 41.10 J/cm2, P < 0.05）, but a similar UVB-MED value （39.60 mJ/cm2 vs. 35.55 mJ/cm2, P > 0.05） compared with the female subjects. No significant difference was observed in the median value of UVA- or UVB-MED in subjects with skin type Ⅲ or Ⅳ between Han and Uygur nationality （all P > 0.05）. Also, no correlation was found in the median value of UVA- or UVB-MED with age or duration of outdoor exposure in the male or female subjects （all P > 0.05）. The lower reference limit was 33.38 J/cm2 for UVA-MED and 27.90 mJ/cm2 for UVB-MED in the population in Urumqi region. Conclusion Skin phototype may be an important determinant of MED.

Key words: Urumqi