Browsing by Autor "Laurie Butler"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item type: Item ,
    Findings From the Great British and Northern Ireland Botulinum Toxin Survey: Treatment Outcomes, Patient Experience, and Regulations From a Cross-Sectional Survey
    (Oxford University Press, 2025) Lee Smith; José Francisco López‐Gil; Julia Gawronska; Yvonne Barnett; Laurie Butler; Helen Keyes; Dong Keon Yon; Damiano Pizzol; Masoud Rahmati; Roshan Ravindran
    Abstract Background Given rising demand for botulinum toxin (BoNT) treatments and limited data on safety, ethics, and regulation, a national survey explored experiences with cosmetic BoNT in the United Kingdom. Objectives To conduct a national observational survey with the aim to capture real-world experiences of cosmetic BoNT in the United Kingdom. Methods A cross-sectional online survey gathered data on experiences with cosmetic BoNT injections across the United Kingdom. Participation was open to adults (≥18 years) who had received cosmetic BoNT treatment. Results A total of 919 participants completed the survey and were predominantly female, white, and had a high household income. Commonly reported acute complications were bruising/swelling (26.1%), and headache (24.7%). Commonly reported long-term complications were BoNT resistance (2.9%), social withdrawal (2.7%), nerve damage (2.5%), and dry eyes/vision problems (2.5%). In total, 66% stated their treatment was administered by a prescriber, 28% said it was not. Among those treated by a non-prescriber, 40% reported that a prescriber was present during the consultation, 42% said no prescriber was present, and 17% were unsure. Surprisingly, a few had not signed a consent form (8%), 11% were not informed of treatment risks, and 18% were not told how to respond to complications. A large majority expressed support for enhanced oversight, with 57.8% favoring significantly stricter regulation, and 31.3% somewhat stricter regulation. Conclusions Cosmetic BoNT can offer high satisfaction and a favorable safety profile when administered appropriately. However, findings highlight key vulnerabilities: inconsistent practitioner qualifications, gaps in informed consent, insufficient complication support, and weak regulation. Level of Evidence:3 (Therapeutic)