Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/29757
Title: Profiling UK injectable aesthetic practitioners: A national cohort analysis
Authors: Zargaran, D
Zargaran, A
Terranova, T
Khaledi, H
Robinson, A
Davies, J
Weyrich, T
Mosahebi, A
Keywords: public health;patient safety;legislation;botulinum toxin;dermal filler
Issue Date: 4-Jul-2023
Publisher: Elsevier on behalf of British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons
Citation: Zargaran, D. et al. (2023) 'Profiling UK injectable aesthetic practitioners: A national cohort analysis', Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 86 pp. 150 - 154. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.06.057.
Abstract: Introduction: The United Kingdom (UK) injectables market has been growing rapidly with a lack of robust regulation and to date, no information regarding the profile of practitioners has been published. Aim: We aim to provide a descriptive and qualitative analysis of the advertised practitioners in the United Kingdom. Methods: We performed a systematic search using the internet search engine Google to perform a qualitative descriptive analysis of aesthetic practitioners in the UK. For each contiguous country in the UK: England, Scotland, and Wales, five searches were performed. The list of practitioners was then cross-referenced with professional regulatory bodies, with extraction of registration number, date of registration and presence or absence from the Specialist Register or General Practitioner Register. Results: 3000 websites were visited and evaluated. 1224 independent clinics with 4405 practitioners were identified. 738 were identified as those in business support functions and the remaining 3667 practitioners were undertaking injectable practice. The profile of professions were doctors 32%, nurses 13%, dentists 24% and dental nurses 8%. Of the 1163 doctors identified 481 were on the specialist register (41%) and 219 were on the GP register (19%). 27 specialties were represented in this cohort analysis. Plastic Surgery formed the majority of those who were on the specialist register at 37%, followed by Dermatology at 18%. Conclusion: This paper is the first to describe the range of practitioners, their professional backgrounds and experience who perform non-surgical aesthetic interventions. The range of backgrounds may have an impact on the potential risks to patients and will be an important consideration in proposed legislation to introduce licensing to the industry.
URI: https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/29757
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2023.06.057
ISSN: 1748-6815
Other Identifiers: ORCiD: David Zargaran https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7105-6832
ORCiD: Helia Khaledi https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8548-2501
ORCiD: Julie Davies https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-3100
ORCiD: Tim Weyrich https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4322-8844
Appears in Collections:Brunel Business School Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdf944.73 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.