» Articles » PMID: 28877310

Consumer Preferences, Product Characteristics, and Potentially Allergenic Ingredients in Best-selling Moisturizers

Overview
Journal JAMA Dermatol
Specialty Dermatology
Date 2017 Sep 7
PMID 28877310
Citations 12
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Importance: Because moisturizer use is critical for the prevention and treatment of numerous dermatological conditions, patients frequently request product recommendations from dermatologists.

Objective: To determine the product performance characteristics and ingredients of best-selling moisturizers.

Design And Setting: This cohort study involved publicly available data of the top 100 best-selling whole-body moisturizing products at 3 major online retailers (Amazon, Target, and Walmart). Products marketed for use on a specific body part (eg, face, hands, eyelids) were excluded.

Main Outcomes And Measures: Pairwise comparisons of median price per ounce on the basis of marketing claims (eg, dermatologist recommended, fragrance free, hypoallergenic) and presence of ingredients represented in the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) series were conducted using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. The effect of vehicle type (eg, ointment, lotion, cream, butter) was assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Cross-reactors and botanicals for fragrances were derived from the American Contact Dermatitis Society's Contact Allergen Management Program database.

Results: A total of 174 unique best-selling moisturizer products were identified, constituting 109 713 reviews as of August 2016. The median price per ounce was $0.59 (range, $0.10-$9.51 per ounce) with a wide range (9400%). The most popular vehicles were lotions (102 [59%]), followed by creams (22 [13%]), oils (21 [12%]), butters (14 [8%]), and ointments (3 [2%]). Only 12% (n = 21) of best-selling moisturizer products were free of NACDG allergens. The 3 most common allergens were fragrance mix (n = 87), paraben mix (n = 75), and tocopherol (n = 74). Products with the claim "dermatologist recommended" had higher median price per ounce ($0.79; interquartile range [IQR], $0.56-$1.27) than products without the claim ($0.59; IQR, $0.34-$0.92). Products with the claim "phthalate free" had higher median price per ounce ($1.38; IQR, $0.86-$1.63) than products without the claim ($0.59; IQR, $0.35-$0.91). Lotions (median, $0.49; IQR, $0.31-0.68) were statistically less expensive per ounce than butters (median, $1.20; IQR, $0.76-$1.63), creams (median, $0.80; IQR, $0.69-$1.25) and oils (median, $1.30; IQR, $0.64-$2.43). For products with a claim of "fragrance free," 18 (45%) had at least 1 fragrance cross-reactor or botanical ingredient. Products without any ingredients in the NACDG (median, $0.83; IQR, $0.47-$1.69) were not statistically more expensive per ounce than products with 1 or more allergens (median, $0.60; IQR, $0.35-$1.06).

Conclusions And Relevance: Best-selling moisturizers vary widely by price and product characteristics. Given the lack of readily available comparison data on moisturizer efficacy, dermatologists should balance consumer preference, price, and allergenicity in their recommendations.

Citing Articles

Patients' preferences on atopic dermatitis skincare and social media use: a qualitative study.

Mazilu R, Ziehfreund S, Traidl S, Zink A BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):467.

PMID: 39910561 PMC: 11800506. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-025-21640-8.


From Nature to Healing: Development and Evaluation of Topical Cream Loaded with Pine Tar for Cutaneous Wound Repair.

Petrovic B, Petrovic A, Bijelic K, Stanisic D, Mitrovic S, Jakovljevic V Pharmaceutics. 2024; 16(7).

PMID: 39065556 PMC: 11279966. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics16070859.


Evaluation of the effect of several moisturizing creams using the low frequency electrical susceptance approach.

Bari D, Ali Z, Hameed S, Yacoob Aldosky H J Electr Bioimpedance. 2024; 15(1):4-9.

PMID: 38410783 PMC: 10896182. DOI: 10.2478/joeb-2024-0002.


Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Phthalate Exposure and Preterm Birth: A Pooled Study of Sixteen U.S. Cohorts.

Welch B, Keil A, Buckley J, Engel S, James-Todd T, Zota A Environ Health Perspect. 2023; 131(12):127015.

PMID: 38117586 PMC: 10732302. DOI: 10.1289/EHP12831.


Comparison of lotions, creams, gels and ointments for the treatment of childhood eczema: the BEE RCT.

Ridd M, Wells S, MacNeill S, Sanderson E, Webb D, Banks J Health Technol Assess. 2023; 27(19):1-120.

PMID: 37924282 PMC: 10679965. DOI: 10.3310/GZQW6681.


References
1.
Eichenfield L, Tom W, Berger T, Krol A, Paller A, Schwarzenberger K . Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis: section 2. Management and treatment of atopic dermatitis with topical therapies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014; 71(1):116-32. PMC: 4326095. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.03.023. View

2.
Seidenari S, Francomano M, Mantovani L . Baseline biophysical parameters in subjects with sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis. 1998; 38(6):311-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05764.x. View

3.
Filanovsky M, Pootongkam S, Tamburro J, Smith M, Ganocy S, Nedorost S . The Financial and Emotional Impact of Atopic Dermatitis on Children and Their Families. J Pediatr. 2015; 169:284-90.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.10.077. View

4.
FULTON Jr J, Pay S, Fulton 3rd J . Comedogenicity of current therapeutic products, cosmetics, and ingredients in the rabbit ear. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984; 10(1):96-105. DOI: 10.1016/s0190-9622(84)80050-x. View

5.
Warshaw E, Maibach H, Taylor J, Sasseville D, DeKoven J, Zirwas M . North American contact dermatitis group patch test results: 2011-2012. Dermatitis. 2015; 26(1):49-59. DOI: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000097. View