Rev Bras Med Esporte Vol. 12, N - PDF document

Rev Bras Med Esporte Vol. 12, Nº 5 – Set/Out, 2006 1.Aluno do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicina – UFRGS. Porto2.Professor/Chefe. Serviço de Epidemiologia e Bioestatística do HCPA-3.Professor Titular/Chefe. Serviço de Dermatologia do HCPA-UFRGS.4.Professor Titular. Faculdade de Educação Física – UFRGS. Porto Alegre,5.Diretor Médico. Comitê Olímpico Brasileiro. Rio de Janeiro, RJ.4/1/06. Final version received in 14/5/06. Approved in 19/7/06. Brazil. Sunburn. Sports. Background and objectives: To evaluate the knowledge and During the XIV Pan-American Games, 115 Brazilian athletesanswered to a questionnaire on sunburn during training and leisu- Themajority was outdoor (73%), and 59% had light phototype (I, II or Vol. 12, Nº 5 – Set/Out, 2006 = 0.05 and the data were analyzed with the SPSS program,RESULTSspectively. The majority of the athletes (73%) affirmed that theyalways or most of the times, perform their sports activities (train- athletes had more sunburns in training than the TABLE 2 Sunburns and solar habits during training and leisure according to the sports practice siteISP training*ISP leisure*Burns trainingBurns leisureUS training**US leisure**Outdoor65/84 (77,4%)54/76 (71,1%)27/84 (32,1%)29/77 (37,7%)32/84 (38,1%)24/84 (28,6%)Indoor11/30 (36,7%)20/28 (71,4%)3/29 (10,3%)8/29 (27,6%)3/29 (10,3%)11/30 (36,7%) p &#x 0,0;
-4;ő.;怀p 0,05p = 0,027p = 0,37p = 0,005p = 0,49 TABLE 1 Light68 (59,1%)Dark47 (40,9%)Outdoor84 (73%)Indoor31 (27%)Yes76 (66,7%)No38 (33,3%)Yes74 (71,2%)No30 (28,8%)Training sunburns (n = 113)Yes30 (26,5%)Yes37 (34,9%)Yes35 (31%)US leisure** (n = 114) Yes35 (30,7%)indoor. In leisure, no statistical difference was observed be- TABLE 3 Burns trainingBurns leisureLight27/66 (40,9%)30/61 (49,2%)3/47 7/45 (15,6%) p p athletes were more used to wearing sunscreen than the phototype is an important risk factor, both during training (OR = athletes to present a higher risk while practicing TABLE 4 Sunburns trainingORIC 95%PLight phototype12,03,2-45,03,90,9-16,05,81,3-25,1 0,50,2-1,60 Sunburns leisureORIC 95%PLight phototype4,21,5-11,90,0072,080,7-6,3ISP*9,571,9-47,70,006 US**1,260,46-3,50,657 athletes find more significant to wearthan the recommendation. All the ath- Rev Bras Med Esporte Vol. 12, Nº 5 – Set/Out, 2006ratio (IC 95% 1,7-6,2) chance of the disease’s development. More-over, suffering sunburns before 15 years of age represented a 5,4the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protec- athletes had suffered more sunburn in training athletes for sunburns during training did not have sta-tistically significant value. It only presented a tendency; we be-that the athletes are more prone to sunburns during theirsports modality. It suggests thus, that their behavior is similar con-neoplasm occurrence in the studied group, with a chances ratio of11,4 (IC 95% 2,6-50,5). Moreover, the frequent use of sunscreenIn the present study, 31% of the athletes wore sunscreen dur-ing training and 30,7% during leisure. Concerning the practice sites,ones, probably due to their activities nature. Concerning lei-sure, both behaved similarly, suggesting that the protection habitin leisure has no connection with the type of sports activity. Thewearing it. Such evidence is still mere speculation, since transver-gest that the solar habits of the athletes from the present sampleAlthough the evaluated athletes seem to know about the risksthat the solar exposure may cause, the sunburns occurred in im- risk group for. The knowledge about the risks of exaggerated sunings of this study.We thank the International Olympic Committee (COI) for the financialfor collaboration and permission during its development. To Dr. NatháliaSoles Masiero for her indefatigable work in the data registry. All the authors declared there is not any potential conflict of inter- 1.Bakos L, Wagner M, Bakos RM, Leite C, Sperhacke C, Dzekaniak K, et al. Sun-in Southern Brazil. Int J Dermatol. 2002;41:557-62.2.Jungers EA, Guenthner ST, Farmer E, Perkins S. A skin cancer education initia-tive at a professional baseball game and results of a skin cancer survey. Int J3.Alam M, Ratner D. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2001;4.Sun T. A sun protection survey of New England fishermen. Cutis. 2003;71(5):407-5.Fisher G, Wang Z, Datta S, Varani J, Kang S, Voorhees JJ. Pathophysiology of6.Loescher LJ, Buller MK, Buller DB, Emerson J, Taylor AM. Public educationprojects in skin cancer. The evolution of skin cancer prevention education forchildren at a comprehensive cancer center. Cancer. 1995;75(2):651-6.7.Rosenberg C, Mayer JA, Eckhardt L. Skin cancer prevention education: a nation-8.Moehrle M, Heinrich L, Schmid A, Garbe C. Extreme UV exposure of profes-sional cyclists. Dermatology. 2000;201(1):44-5.9.Melville SK, Rosenthal FS, Luckmann R, Lew RA. Quantitative ultraviolet skin10.Moehrle M. Ultraviolet exposure in the Ironman triathlon. Med Sci Sports Exerc.11.Fitzpatrick TB. Soleil et peau. J Med Esthet. 1975;3:33-4.12.Gandini S, Sera F, Cattaruzza MS, Pasquini P, Picconi O, Boyle P, et al. Meta-analysis of risk factors for cutaneous melanoma: II. Sun exposure. Eur J Cancer.13.Loria D, Matos E. Risk factors for cutaneous melanoma: a case-control study in14.International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Guidelines onlimits of exposure to ultraviolet radiation of wavelengths between 180 nm and400 nm (incoherent optical radiation). Health Physics. 2004;87(2):171-86.15.Campanha de Prevenção ao Câncer de Pele da Sociedade Brasileira de Derma-tologia de 2005. Available from: URL: http://www.sbd.org.br/campanha/estatisti-cas.html. Acesso em 19.1.2006.16.Marks R. Epidemiology of melanoma. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2000;25:459-63.