Articles

Validation of a sensitive skin screening questionnaire in a Southeast Asian population

Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Published: 12 November 2026
25
Views
9
Downloads

Authors

Sensitive skin syndrome (SSS) is common, but the lactic acid stinging test (LAST), a provocation-based reference procedure, is not always feasible in routine practice. This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study evaluated a brief trigger-based questionnaire against LAST in Vietnamese adult outpatients attending for health check-ups. A total of 198 participants completed a questionnaire including one self-identification item and 10 trigger items before undergoing LAST. The questionnaire showed acceptable discrimination for LAST positivity (area under the curve [AUC]=0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.84). A post hoc cut-off of ≥3 triggers provided 68.9% sensitivity, 78.9% specificity, and 72.7% overall accuracy. LAST positivity was more frequent among women than men, and Fitzpatrick phototype distributions differed significantly between LAST groups. Self-reported sensitive skin, sun exposure, and cosmetic use were associated with LAST positivity in the multivariable analysis, although the estimates require caution because of imprecision and possible overfitting. This concise questionnaire may help identify adults likely to be LAST-positive in comparable outpatient settings. LAST positivity is not a definitive diagnosis of SSS, and external validation is required before broader use.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

Misery L, Weisshaar E, Brenaut E, et al.; Special Interest Group on sensitive skin of the International Forum for the Study of Itch (ISFI). Pathophysiology and management of sensitive skin: position paper from the special interest group on sensitive skin of the International Forum for the Study of Itch (IFSI). J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2020;34:222-9.
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;32:791-5.
Farage MA. The Prevalence of Sensitive Skin. Front Med 2019;6:98.
Richters R, Falcone D, Uzunbajakava N, et al. What is sensitive skin? A systematic literature review of objective measurements. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2015;28:75-83.
Buhé V, Vié K, Guéré C, et al. Pathophysiological Study of Sensitive Skin. Acta Derm Venereol 2016;96:314-8.
Corazza M, Guarneri F, Montesi L, et al. Proposal of a self-assessment questionnaire for the diagnosis of sensitive skin. J Cosmet Dermatol 2022;21:2488-96.
Pan Y, Ma X, Song Y, et al. Questionnaire and Lactic Acid Sting Test Play Different Role on the Assessment of Sensitive Skin: A Cross-sectional Study. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2021;14:1215-25.
Gougerot A, Vigan M, Bourrain JL, et al. SIGL: Is this a clinical evaluation tool for reactive skins? Nouv Dermatol 2007;26:461-4.
Misery L, Jean-Decoster C, Mery S, et al. A new ten-item questionnaire for assessing sensitive skin: the Sensitive Scale-10. Acta Derm Venereol 2014;94:635-9.
Guerra-Tapia A, Serra-Baldrich E, Prieto Cabezas L, et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of Sensitive Skin Syndrome: An Algorithm for Clinicalì Practice. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed) 2019;110:800-8. English, Spanish.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al.; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:344-9.
Brenaut E, Barnetche T, Le Gall-Ianotto C, et al. Triggering factors in sensitive skin from the worldwide patients’ point of view: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2020;34:230-8.
Steyerberg EW. Clinical Prediction Models. Springer; 2009.
Steyerberg EW, Vickers AJ, Cook NR, et al. Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass) 2010;21:128-38.
Vickers AJ, Holland F. Decision curve analysis to evaluate the clinical benefit of prediction models. Spine J 2021;21:1643-8.
Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006;26:565-74.
Van Calster B, Wynants L, Verbeek JFM, et al. Reporting and Interpreting Decision Curve Analysis: A Guide for Investigators. Eur Urol 2018;74:796-804.
Stevens RJ, Poppe KK. Validation of clinical prediction models: what does the “calibration slope” really measure? J Clin Epidemiol 2020;118:93-9.

How to Cite



1.
Thi Hong Nguyen N, Huu Le D, Nguyet Vu M, Thi Thu Do H, Thai Vu H, Thi Ha Nguyen V. Validation of a sensitive skin screening questionnaire in a Southeast Asian population. Dermatol Reports [Internet]. 2026 Nov. 12 [cited 2026 Nov. 15];. Available from: https://journals.pagepress.net/dr/article/view/10944