Treating Your Acne with Home Devices

January 02, 2010

Acne has been the bane of teenagers and adults as well. It has been estimated that 85% of people have acne at some time during their lives. Throughout the years the primary treatments for acne have been oral medications including antibiotics, Accutane and others. Topical medications including topical antibiotics, benzoyl peroxide and retinoids have also played a role.

Various devices have been used, over the years, to further improve the results of treatment, but these devices have never been first line treatments for acne. Ultraviolet light and x-ray were effective in the past, but we now understand that their risks exceed their benefits. Currently certain lasers and light systems, sometimes in conjunction with chemicals, are used as part of an acne treatment regimen.

This has provided an opening for medical device makers to design and market devices that are intended to be sold directly to patients. When devices are sold to physicians, the size of the market is limited. When devices can be sold directly to consumers, the market size is almost unlimited. Furthermore, devices may be labeled as FDA approved, and most people think that this means that the FDA has recognized that the device is effective. In fact, FDA approval of a device only means that the FDA judges that the device will not cause harm. It says nothing about the effectiveness of the device.

The latest devices directed at acne sufferers are the Tanda Skincare System ($250), the Claro ($275) and the No!No! Skin ($180). These devices use light or heat, or a combination of the two. These devices claim an effectiveness of 80% (No!No!Skin) to 94% (Claro). In fact, we don't have devices in our offices that are as effective as these devices claim to be, and if we did, they would be first line therapy, better than antibiotics and topicals. Furthermore, to avoid side effects including burns and eye damage, the manufacturers keep the energy output of their devices very low. The devices used in medical offices are of much higher energy, and have an increased risk of side effects.

Now, since I have not tested any of these home treatment devices I cannot state with certainty that they are worthless. However, my guess is that the odds of any of these devices behaving better than a placebo in a well designed study is perhaps slightly greater than the odds that you will open your door tomorrow morning and be greeted by a Martian.

Gerald N. Bock MD

California Skin & Laser Center

Stockton & Lodi, CA