Patients liked the result; only 2 of 25 dermatologists rated it better
Short answer
Nine people had three 1450 nm diode laser treatments for eye-area wrinkles and all reported mild to moderate improvement. But when 25 independent dermatologists judged before-and-after photos, only two rated the results as significantly better. The authors conclude non-ablative laser treatment satisfies patients but does not convince objective judgement.
- Study
- Kopera D, Smolle J, Kaddu S, et al. Br J Dermatol. 2004;150(5):936-9.
- Design
- Blinded photo evaluation
- People
- 9 patients, 25 dermatologist raters
- Topic
- Periorbital wrinkles
Why it matters
This is an important null result: it shows the gap between how people feel about a treatment and what independent experts can see.
What they did
- Treated nine people with skin types II–IV three times, three weeks apart, using a 1450 nm diode laser.
- Took standardised photos before and one month after treatment.
- Asked 25 independent dermatologists to rate the photos.
What they found
- All patients were satisfied and reported mild to moderate improvement.
- Only 2 of 25 dermatologists gave ratings significantly in favour of an effect.
What it cannot tell you
- Very small sample of nine patients.
- Only one month of follow-up; collagen remodelling can take longer.
- Clinic device and settings, not a home laser.
Takeaway
Self-reported satisfaction is not the same as visible change. When reading any device claim, look for blinded, independent assessment.
Matching devices
Devices whose published technology match this study: NIRA Pro 3. None of them was the device tested unless the study names it.
Not medical advice. Summary based on the published abstract; read the full paper for detail.