Article Figures & Data
Tables
- Table 1.
Sample characteristics overall and by indoor tanning (IT) dependence
Sample N = 389 + IT Dependence N = 88 − IT Dependence N = 301 P Demographics Age, mean (SD), range 18–30, y 23.3 (3.0) 22.9 (2.8) 23.4 (3.1) 0.113 ≥College education 244 (62.7) 47 (53.4) 197 (65.5) 0.040 <College education 145 (37.3) 41 (46.6) 104 (34.5) Income ≥ $50,000 198 (50.9) 49 (55.7) 149 (49.5) 0.308 Income < $50,000 or not reported 191 (49.1) 39 (44.3) 152 (50.5) Season of study participation Spring 102 (26.2) 21 (23.9) 81 (26.9) Summer 112 (28.8) 25 (28.4) 87 (28.9) 0.929 Fall 114 (29.3) 27 (30.7) 87 (28.9) Winter 61 (15.7) 15 (17.1) 46 (15.3) Skin cancer risk factors Always/usually burn 93 (24.0) 20 (22.7) 73 (24.3) 0.756 Rarely/never burn 296 (76.0) 68 (77.3) 227 (75.7) Red/blonde hair 145 (37.3) 31 (35.2) 114 (37.9) 0.652 Brown/black hair 244 (62.7) 57 (64.8) 187 (62.1) FDR w/melanoma 61 (15.7) 15 (17.1) 46 (15.3) 0.689 No FDR w/melanoma 328 (84.3) 73 (82.9) 255 (84.7) Intentional outdoor tanning, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.4 (0.83) 3.5 (0.84) 3.3 (0.83) 0.028 Past 12-month sunburns, mean (SD), range 0–5 2.6 (1.3) 2.8 (1.3) 2.5 (1.3) 0.103 IT Behavior Age IT initiation, mean (SD), range 8–28, y 17.1 (2.6) 16.2 (2.2) 17.4 (2.6) <0.001 Past year IT frequency 1 or 2 times 74 (19.0) 8 (9.1) 66 (21.9) 3–9 times 145 (37.3) 27 (30.7) 118 (39.2) <0.001 10–19 times 75 (19.3) 16 (18.2) 59 (19.6) ≥20 times 95 (24.2) 37 (42.0) 58 (19.3) Opioid-like IT reactions, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.5 (0.93) 3.8 (1.0) 3.4 (.89) 0.002 IT Beliefs Benefits of IT, mean (SD), range 1–5 2.8 (0.66) 3.0 (0.77) 2.7 (0.61) <0.001 Attitudes, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.9 (0.59) 4.2 (0.49) 3.8 (0.59) <0.001 Perceived susceptibility risks, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.2 (0.69) 3.4 (0.70) 3.1 (0.67) <0.001 Perceived severity risks, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.8 (0.70) 3.7 (0.72) 3.8 (0.70) 0.092 Alcohol & tobacco Current cigarette smoker 73 (18.8) 15 (17.0) 58 (19.3) 0.638 Nonsmoker 316 (81.2) 73 (83.0) 243 (80.7) Past 30-day binge drinking 278 (71.5) 59 (67.0) 219 (72.8) 0.297 No past 30-day binge drinking 111 (28.5) 29 (33.0) 82 (27.2) Psychologic risk factors Sensation seeking, mean (SD), range 1–4 2.7 (0.67) 2.8 (0.67) 2.6 (0.67) 0.109 Self-esteem, mean (SD), range 0–3 22.3 (5.5) 20.3 (6.0) 22.9 (5.3) <0.001 Appearance orientation, mean (SD), range 1–5 3.8 (0.63) 4.0 (0.60) 3.7 (0.62) <0.001 Depressive symptoms Screen + depressive symptoms 185 (47.6) 66 (75.0) 119 (39.5) <0.001 Screen – depressive symptoms 204 (52.4) 22 (25.0) 182 (60.5) NOTE: Cells display no. (%) unless noted in the row label. Some variables do not sum to total sample size due to sporadic missing data (<1% for any given variable).
Abbreviation: FDR, first-degree relative.
- Table 2.
Frequency of reported IT dependence symptoms overall and by IT dependence
Sample, N = 389 + IT Dependence N = 88 − IT Dependence N = 301 P mCAGE Cut down: have you tried to stop tanning, but still continue? 65 (16.7) 53 (60.2) 12 (4.0) <0.001 Annoyed: do you ever get annoyed when people tell you not to tan? 179 (46.0) 75 (85.2) 104 (34.6) <0.001 Guilty: do you ever feel guilty that you tan too much? 130 (33.4) 63 (71.6) 67 (22.3) <0.001 Eye opener: when you wake up in the morning, do you want to tan? 49 (12.6) 35 (40.2) 14 (4.7) <0.001 ≥2 CAGE Symptoms 111 (28.5) 88 (100) 23 (20.7) <0.001 mDSM Tolerance: do you feel that you need to spend more time tanning in order to maintain your tan? 169 (43.4) 64 (72.7) 105 (34.9) <0.001 Withdrawal: do you feel unattractive or anxious to tan if you do not maintain your tan? 173 (44.7) 68 (78.2) 105 (34.9) <0.001 Should decrease/stop: do you think you should stop tanning or decrease the time you spend tanning? 150 (38.6) 61 (69.3) 89 (29.6) <0.001 Unsuccessful quitting: have you tried to stop tanning, but still continue? 64 (16.5) 53 (60.9) 11 (3.6) <0.001 Missed obligations: have you ever missed a social engagement, work, school, or other recreational activities because you went tanning instead? 34 (8.7) 16 (18.2) 18 (6.0) <0.001 Trouble at work or home: have you ever gotten into trouble at work, with family, or with friends due to tanning? 22 (5.7) 13 (14.8) 9 (3.0) <0.001 Tan despite knowing risks: Do you continue to tan despite knowing that it is bad for your skin? 325 (83.6) 86 (97.7) 239 (79.4) <0.001 Tan despite personal/family history of skin cancer: have you ever had a skin cancer or do you have a first-degree relative (mother, father, sister, brother) who has had skin cancer? 72 (18.6) 17 (19.5) 55 (18.3) 0.799 ≥3 mDSM Symptoms 191 (49.1) 88 (100) 103 (34.2) <0.001 Positive Screen for IT Dependence 88 (22.6) 88 (100) 0 (0) n/a NOTE: Positive screen for IT dependence defined as ≥2 mCAGE and ≥3 mDSM symptoms endorsed. Cells display no. (%).
Abbreviations: mCAGE, modified CAGE; mDSM, modified Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV.
- Table 3.
Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression model of correlates of IT dependence
Unadjusted OR (95% CI) P aOR (95% CI) P Demographics Education <College education Ref. Ref. ≥College education 0.60 (0.37–0.97) 0.037 0.84 (0.47–1.50) 0.548 Melanoma risk factors Intentional outdoor tanning 1.39 (1.03–1.87) 0.029 1.29 (0.91–1.85) 0.152 IT Behavior Age of IT initiation, y 0.79 (0.71–0.89) <0.001 0.85 (0.74–0.97) 0.017 Past year IT frequency 1 or 2 times Ref. Ref. 3–9 times 1.89 (0.81–4.39) 0.495 1.80 (0.67–4.81) 0.774 10–19 times 2.24 (0.89–5.61) 0.902 1.45 (0.49–4.30) 0.612 ≥20 times 5.26 (2.27–12.21) <0.001 3.03 (1.11–8.32) 0.015 Opioid-like reactions 1.57 (1.18–2.10) 0.002 1.06 (0.76–1.47) 0.738 IT Beliefs & perceptions Benefits of IT 2.22 (1.52–3.25) <0.001 2.15 (1.28–3.61) 0.004 Attitudes 3.43 (2.14–5.51) <0.001 1.25 (0.67–2.31) 0.478 Perceived susceptibility to risks 2.19 (1.52–3.17) <0.001 2.72 (1.67–4.42) <0.001 Perceived severity of risks 0.75 (0.53–1.05) 0.092 0.88 (0.57–1.34) 0.549 Psychologic risk factors Self-esteem 0.92 (0.88–0.96) <0.001 1.01 (0.95–1.07) 0.724 Appearance orientation 2.68 (1.73–4.17) <0.001 1.73 (1.03–2.90) 0.037 Depressive symptoms Screen – depressive symptoms Ref. Ref. Screen + depressive symptoms 4.59 (2.69–7.83) <0.001 3.79 (1.90–7.57) <0.001 Hosmer–Lemeshow χ2 — 5.18 (8 df) 0.738 NOTE: Variables correlated with IT dependence at P < 0.10 in two-sample comparisons in Table 1 were included in regression models.
Additional Files
Supplementary Data
- Supplementary Table 1 - Adjusted logistic regression model of correlates of indoor tanning (IT) dependence including all variables
November 2017
Volume 26, Issue 11
Volume 26, Issue 11
Indoor Tanning Dependence in Young Adult Women
Jump to section
Advertisement