A photonumeric scale for the assessment of cutaneous photodamage

Papulopustular rosacea: Prevalence and relationship to photodamage

“…This photonumeric scale was shown to have good interobserver agreement and repeatability, proved superior to a descriptive grading system, 24 and has been considered suitable for epidemiologic studies of photoaging. 25 PPR was diagnosed if the patient had at least 5 inflammatory, erythematous papules and/or pustules present in a centrofacial distribution on a background of erythema.…”

“…Clinical examination of the face assessed the extent of cutaneous photodamage using the photonumeric scale of Griffiths et al 24 This scale, ranging from 0 to 8, was designed to assess cutaneous photodamage, as portrayed by coarse and fine wrinkles, dyspigmentation, elastoidosis, and comedones. This photonumeric scale was shown to have good interobserver agreement and repeatability, proved superior to a descriptive grading system, 24 and has been considered suitable for epidemiologic studies of photoaging.…”

Human Cell-Conditioned Media Produced Under Embryonic-Like Conditions Result in Improved Healing Time After Laser Resurfacing

“…For the clinical evaluation of the hCCM-containing gel, male and female subjects ages 40 to 70 years were enrolled. The subjects included in the study had Fitzpatrick scores of 2 to 4 and at least moderate scores on the Manifestation of Photodamage Scale [8].…”

Non-surgical treatment modalities of facial photodamage: practical knowledge for the oral and maxillofacial professional

“…The main parameters for such an evaluation include documentation of appearance and degree of fine and coarse wrinkles, irregular hyperpigmentation, laxity, roughness and sallowness. Based on these parameters, a 9-point photonumeric scale was developed by GRIFFITHS et al 29 to facilitate clinician evaluation of facial photodamage. This grading method involves comparison of the patient's facial photodamage against a reference series of photographs from subjects representing a standard grade of photodamage from none to severe (0 to 9).…”

“…In general, photographs are useful objective tools to document the various signs of photodamage before an intervention or before starting topical treatment to provide baseline comparison and to monitor progress 27,29 . Photographs should be taken in a standardized manner to allow follow-up comparisons.…”