TY - JOUR
AU - Gambichler, Thilo
AB - This article was written to update information on test methods and standards for determining the UV protection of apparel textiles and on factors affecting UV protective properties of fabrics, from dermatological and textile technological viewpoints. Articles from dermatological and textile technological journals published from 1990 to 2001 were identified from MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica/EMBASE, World Textiles, and Textile Technology Digest. Peer-reviewed dermatological articles, textile technological research articles, and normative publications were selected. Independent data extraction was performed by several observers. Spectrophotometry is the preferred method for determining UV protection factor of textile materials. Various textile qualities affect the UV protection factor of a finished garment; important elements are the fabric porosity, type, color, weight, and thickness. The application of UV absorbers in the yarns significantly improves the UV protection factor of a garment. With wear and use, several factors can alter the UV protective properties of a textile, including stretch, wetness, and degradation due to laundering. Standards in the field exist in Australia and Great Britain, and organizations such as the European Standardization Commission in Europe and the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists and the American Society for Testing and Materials in the United States are also establishing standards for the determination and labeling of sun protective clothing. Various textile qualities and conditions of wear and use affect UV protective properties of apparel textiles. The use of UV blocking fabrics can provide excellent protection against the hazards of sunlight; this is especially true for garments manufactured as UV protective clothing.For years, a rising incidence of skin cancer has been observed worldwide. Although there are many factors involved in the onset of skin cancers, the cumulative UV exposure of a patient is an important variable. Apart from avoidance of the sun, the most frequently recommended form of UV protection has been the use of sunscreens. The recommendation of textiles as a means of sun protection has previously been underrated, even though suitable clothing offers simple and effective protection against the sun.Especially in Australia, cancer education campaigns have long urged the use of clothing in conjunction with hats and sunscreens as UV protection. Nevertheless, several studies have recently shown that, contrary to popular opinion, some textiles provide only limited UV protection.In addition, it was found that one third of commercial summer clothing items provided a sun protection factor of less than 15.Protection from skin cancer by clothing has been assessed in only one study,using a hairless mouse model. However, a direct relationship between the UV transmission of clothing and skin tumor formation has been reported in a patient with xeroderma pigmentosum.Suitable UV protective clothing may also prevent exacerbation of photosensitivity disorders.Given the increasing interest in sun protection, recreationally and occupationally, test methods and a rating scheme for clothing were needed that would ensure sufficient UV protection. The Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS)was the first normative publication offering test methods to be used for determining UV protection factor (UPF) and a classification scheme. Clothing with UV protection ratings has been available in Australia for several years, particularly recreational wear such as beachwear and elastane bodysuits for small children. A worldwide effort has been under way to study factors that affect the UV protection provided by clothing. However, systematic research to quantify the effect of various manufacturing techniques is difficult, as these variables are rarely independent. Therefore, detailed information about the description and quantification of different chemical and physical characteristics of manufactured samples is needed, but this is often missing from articles published in dermatological journals. Thus, we review the previous work of dermatologists, physicists, and textile technologists in the field. Articles from dermatological and textile technological journals from 1990 to 2001 were retrieved using MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica/EMBASE, World Textiles, and Textile Technology Digest.TEST METHODS FOR QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF UV PROTECTION OF TEXTILESIn VitroDirect and diffuse UV transmittance through a fabric is the crucial factor determining the UV protection of textiles. Radiometric UV transmission tests use a broadband UV light source filtered for UV-B or combined UV-A and UV-B spectral regions to illuminate a fabric sample. The total UV transmission through the textile is measured by a radiometer. For correct measurement, this test method requires a UV source that closely matches the solar spectrum, with detectors that respond similarly to human skin. Nevertheless, this technique is simple and suitable when a relative variation in UPF needs to be measured. Spectroradiometers or spectrophotometers collect transmitted and scattered radiation with the aid of an integrating sphere positioned behind a textile sample. Although spectrophotometers fitted with a double monochromator have a large dynamic range and high accuracy, regular scans of the UV source (deuterium or xenon arc lamp) are required to provide reference data.As suggested by the AS/NZSand European standard,the spectrophotometer should be fitted with a UV radiation transmitting filter for wavelengths of less than 400 nm (UG-11 filter; Schott, Mainz, Germany) to minimize errors caused by fluorescence from whitening agents. The spectrophotometric measurements are performed in the wavelength range of 290 to 400 nm, in 5-nm steps or less. For UPF determination, at least 4 textile samples must be taken from a garment, 2 in the machine direction and 2 in the cross-machine direction. To determine the in vitro UPF, the spectral irradiance (of the source and transmitted spectrum) is weighted against the erythemal action spectrum, as follows:UPF = ∫ EλSλdλ/ ∫ EλSλTλdλ,where λ is the wavelength in nm; Eλ, relative erythemal spectral effectiveness; Sλ, solar spectral irradiance of the source in watts per square meter; dλ, bandwidth in nanometer; and Tλ, spectral transmission of the sample. The integrals (∫) are calculated over the wavelength range of 290 to 400 nm.Analogous to the sun protection factor of sunscreens, UPFis defined as the ratio of the average effective UV irradiance calculated for unprotected skin to the average effective UV irradiance calculated for skin protected by the test fabric. Intercomparison measurements of different testing laboratories have shown that spectrophotometry is an accurate and reproducible test method for determining UPF, particularly for samples with UPFs below 50.However, UPFs of 50 and higher are only of theoretical interest, as even in Australia the maximum daily UV exposure is about 35 minimal erythema doses (MEDs). Ultraviolet transmission measurements of textiles are generally made under worst-case conditions, with collimated radiation at right angles to the fabric. Thus, the actual UV protection of a particular textile would always be greater than the measurement obtained using spectrophotometry.In VivoWith human volunteers, use of the sun as the UV source is impracticable to test the UPF of fabrics. Generally, xenon arc solar simulators are used, with filters to absorb wavelengths below 290 nm and to reduce visible and infrared radiation. Stanfordand Giesand their coworkers described in vivo test methods based on MED testing. However, the most frequently performed in vivo test method is in vivo confirmation of the UPFs measured in vitro.Based on skin phototype, MED is determined using incremental UV-B doses on the upper back of a subject and is read after 24 hours. To measure the MED of protected skin, a textile is placed over the skin on the other side of the back. The incremental UV-B doses for determining the MED of unprotected skin are multiplied by the UPF determined in vitro, with the product being the incremental UV-B doses for MED testing of the protected skin. The in vivo and in vitro methods are in agreement if the ratio of the MED of protected skin to the MED of unprotected skin results in the original in vitro UPF. Several studies,however, have shown that UPFs determined using the in vivo "on skin" method are significantly lower than the UPFs obtained in vitro. Again, as with the in vitro test method, the actual UPF of a garment would probably be much higher than the UPF determined using the in vivo test method. Cost and impracticability are limitations of the in vivo test methods. Some in vivo tests have used polysulfone dosimeters as small portable badges monitoring UV doses on mobile subjects.Ravishankar and Diffeyconcluded that the actual protection provided by textiles worn in sunlight is, on average, 50% higher than that measured by conventional in vitro testing using collimated radiation beams. Similar results were found in studies of a biological UV-detector film using Bacillus subtilis.TEXTILE QUALITIES AND UV PROTECTIONMaterialSummer clothing is usually made of cotton, viscose, rayon, linen, polyester, or combinations thereof. Other types of materials, such as nylon or elastane, are also found in bathing suits, nylon stockings, and other garments. Consumers generally consider lightweight nonsynthetic fabrics (cotton and linen) to be the most comfortable for summer wear. Comparison of the UPF of different types of material is difficult and possible only in limited situations. This is because certain production steps (dying and finishing) vary based on the material, resulting in a comparison of the "material-color-finish" combination and not of the material itself. In the case of synthetic fibers, such as polyester and polyamide, an analysis is even more difficult because the UV protection of these materials depends on the type and quantity of additives to the fiber, such as antioxidants or UV stabilizers. In accordance with most studies,the type of fiber used to construct a textile can have a substantial effect on the UPF, especially for white and nondyed fabrics. Bleached cotton and viscose rayon are transparent to UV radiation and thus provide relatively low UV protection. This was recently confirmed by Crews et al,who reported that bleached cotton print cloth had a UV transmission of 23.7%, whereas the same unbleached fabric had a UV transmission of only 14.4%. The effect of bleaching was also evident among silk fabrics in their study. Compared with bleached textiles, unbleached fabrics such as cotton and silk have better UV protective properties due to UV-absorbing natural pigments and other impurities. Polyester usually has good UV blocking properties, as this fabric allows relatively little UV-B transmission, probably because of the large conjugated system of polymer chains.Polyester (or polyester blends) may be the most suitable fabric type for UV protective garments (Table 1). However, its permeability for wavelengths in the UV-A range is frequently higher than that of other fiber types; this could be of significance for wearers with polymorphic light eruption, solar urticaria, chronic actinic dermatitis, or actinic prurigo (Table 2).Table 1. Summary of Factors Significantly Affecting the UPF of Apparel Textiles*Fabric materialUPFs of cotton, viscose, rayon, and linen are usually smaller than UPFs of nylon, wool, and silk; polyester provides usually high UPFsFabric porosity, weight, and thicknessUPF increases with decreasing yarn-to-yarn spaces and increasing fabric weight and thicknessFabric colorUPF increases with darker colorsUV absorbersUPF is improved by UV absorbersStretchUPF decreases under stretchWetnessUPF decreases when cotton becomes wetWashingUPF increases for cotton fabrics*UPF indicates UV protection factor.Table 2. General Recommendations About UV Protective Clothing for Patients With Photosensitivity*Clothing labeled as UV protective,with a UPF of at least 30, is preferredThe less transparent a fabric is to visible light, the better the UV protection isThe darker the color of the fabric, the better the UV protection isPolyester or polyester blends usually offer better UV protectionStretch and wetness of cotton fabrics significantly decrease their UPFLooser fits are preferable; the garment should cover the skin as much as possibleNew clothing, especially cotton fabrics, should be washed before wearing; special laundry detergents and fabric conditioners may be used that include broadband UV protective absorbersDespite a high UPF, a fabric's UV-A transmission can be significant*UPF indicates UV protection factor.Porosity, Weight, and ThicknessResearchers have referred to fabric porosity by a variety of terms, including cover factor, tightness of weave, and fabric openness. Cover factormay be defined as the percentage area occupied by warp and filling yarns in a given fabric area. To understand the relationship between UV transmission and fabric structure, an "ideal" fabric is proposed, in which the yarns are completely opaque to UV radiation and the holes or spaces between the yarns are very small. Ultraviolet transmission through ideal fabric is related to the cover factor of the fabric with opaque yarns as follows: % UV transmission = 100 − % cover factor.Fabric construction is the primary determinant of fabric porosity, followed by fabric weight. The closer the weave or knitting, the less UV radiation is transmitted. Spaces between the yarns are generally larger in a knit fabric than in a woven textile, and plain woven textiles have a lower porosity than textiles woven using other weaves.An increase in weight per unit area also decreases fabric porosity. The spaces between the yarns are smaller in heavier textiles, permitting transmission of less UV radiation. However, yarns are usually not opaque to UV radiation; thus, UPFs of actual fabrics are lower than those of an ideal fabric. In most studies,thickness measurements for the fabrics were not undertaken or reported. However, thickness is a useful variable for understanding differences in UV protection between fabrics. Crews and coworkersreported that thicker, denser fabrics transmit less UV radiation and concluded that thickness is most useful in explaining differences in UV transmission when differences in percentage cover factor are also accounted for.Color and UV AbsorbersThe dyes used to color a textile can affect the UV protectiveness of a fabric, depending on the position and intensity of the UV wavelength absorption bands of the dyes and the concentration of the dyes in the textile. The absorbance of UV radiation can affect substrate attributes, including fluorescence, photodegradation, and UV protection. Generally, dark colors provide better UV protection due to increased UV absorption. However, particular hue dyes can vary considerably in the degree of UV protectiveness because of individual transmission and absorption characteristics.To improve UV protection, UV absorbers have been added using different techniques. Ultraviolet absorbers for laundry detergents and rinse cycle application have been recently developed.Ultraviolet absorbers are colorless compounds that absorb in the wavelength range of 290 to 400 nm. Hilfiker and colleaguesfound that cover factor was useful in predicting the maximum UPF achievable by treating yarns with UV absorbers. Thus, fabrics could be made opaque to UV radiation with a sufficient level of UV absorber impregnation, and the corresponding UPFs approached the theoretically predicted levels based on the cover factor. Titan dioxide of various particle sizes is frequently used as a UV absorbing substance in fabrics; however, the absorption of these particles is frequently less protective in the UV-A wavelength range. Other manufactured UV absorbers also provide less protection from UV-A radiation, which should be considered when counseling patients with photosensitivity disorders. However, UV absorbers are suitable for enhancing UV protectiveness, especially that of nondyed lightweight summer fabrics, such as cotton and viscose, which offer a high level of wearing comfort.WEARING CONDITIONS AFFECTING UV PROTECTION OF TEXTILESStretchStretching a textile causes an increase in fabric porosity, with a consequent decrease in UPF. Moon and Pailthorpefound that stretching elastane-based garments about 10% in the machine and cross-machine directions causes a dramatic decrease in the measured UPF of a textile. Their consumer survey also showed that, on average, about 15% stretch is achieved when these textiles are worn. However, the 15% is for "power-stretch" garments, which are only a small segment of the clothing market, and elastane-based textiles for tight fitting clothes should not be considered as UV protective clothing.Kimlin et alreported that the UPF of 50-denier stockings decreased 868% when stretched 30% greater than their original size. Notably, the most popular type of stockings (15-denier) provides a UPF of less than 2.The maximum stretch point on the body for tight fitting garments is the upper back, where textiles can be stretched up to 15%. However, realistically, the effect of stretch on the UPF of a textile may be significant only for garments with a nonstretched UPF of less than 30, particularly leggings, women's stockings, and swimsuits.WetnessWhen textiles become wet, by air hydration, perspiration, or water, UV transmission through the fabric can significantly change, with a marked reduction of UPF observed for textiles made from cotton and cotton blends. In a field-based study, it was recently shown that significant UV exposures may occur beneath garments, particularly those made of white cotton fabrics when wet.Moreover, wetting of stretched polyamide and elastane fabrics causes a large reduction in measured UPF. Similar results were also found for in vivo measurements of UPFs of cotton and polyester blends.One explanation for this is that the presence of water in the interstices of a fabric reduces optical scattering effects and, hence, increases UV transmission of the textile. This is analogous to a T-shirt that becomes transparent when wet. However, UV protection of wet garments is not necessarily poor. In fabrics made of viscose or silk, or in fabrics that have been treated with broadband UV absorbers, the UPF may increase when the textile becomes wet.This was also observed in a recent studyof modal and polyester crepe fabrics treated with titan dioxide.LaunderingStanford and coworkersconducted laundering trials using cotton T-shirts. They showed that UPFs increased after the first washing and did not change significantly with subsequent washing. The original UPF of a new cotton T-shirt was found to be 15, increasing to UPF 35 after the first laundering. These UPFs were obtained when participants were instructed to wear their T-shirt for 4 to 8 hours per week and to wash their T-shirt once per week for 10 wash-and-wear cycles.Most fabrics undergo a combination of relaxation and consolidation shrinkage when washed. Thus, the spaces between the yarns decrease and UV protection increases. The effect of laundering on UPF raises questions about qualities and factors of other fabrics that decrease UPF. However, there is a lack of reports of wash-and-wear trials using other fabric types.UV Radiation and Thermic EffectsPhotostability of a textile and its UV protective properties is an important requirement for UV protective clothing. However, there are only limited data on the stability of UV protectiveness of a textile against UV or infrared radiation. Below particular wavelengths, photolytic processes of fibers have been observed in various fabrics, independent of other factors (temperature, oxygen, and hydration): linen, <360 nm; cotton, <350 nm; viscose, <340 nm; and silk and polyester, <310 nm. Photo-oxidation of fibers can occur above these wavelengths in association with oxidative and hydrolytic processes. For most fabrics, durability against thermic effects decreases above 80°C.In durability tests of long-term UV exposure on 12 samples, the decrease in UPF was not dramatic (J. Laperre, PhD, unpublished data, 2000).STANDARDS FOR UV PROTECTIVE CLOTHINGThe AS/NZS 4399sets requirements for determining and labeling the UPF of sun protective textiles and other items that are worn in close proximity to the skin. Based on the standard, the spectrophotometrically determined UPF is for a fabric and does not address the degree of protection that is afforded by the design of a garment. The effects of stretch, wetness, wear, and use are not included in this standard. According to the AS/NZS, UPFs are classified in 3 categories: UPFs of 15 to 24 (ratings 15 and 20) offer good protection; UPFs of 25 to 39 (ratings 25, 30, and 35), very good protection; and UPFs of 40 and higher (ratings 40, 45, 50, and 50+), excellent protection. Textiles with a UPF of less than 15 are not labeled.Apart from the Australian and New Zealand committees, United States, British, Canadian, South African, and multinational groups (eg, Commission on Illumination, International Organization for Standardization) have engaged in writing UV protective textile standard documents (K.L. Hatch, PhD, written communication, February 2001).In Europe, 30 experts from 11 European member states, forming a working group of the European Standardization Commission, have developed a new standard on requirements for test methods and labeling of sun protective clothing. In contrast to the AS/NZS, only textiles with UPFs of 30 and higher may be labeled as sun protective clothing, one reason being that testing performed in different laboratories can lead to different UPF classifications. This was recently confirmed by an intercomparison trial of 8 laboratories.Moreover, UPFs of 30 and higher may be resistant against the effects of stretch, wetness, and environmental stresses. However, since sun intensity is less in Europe than in Australia, a garment with an original UPF of 30 that decreases with stretch to UPF 15 would still provide sufficient sun protection in Europe. In addition, UPF usually improves after the first washing. Besides, the average UV-A transmission determined according to the European standard is proposed to be smaller than 5%. Futhermore, the European standardincludes stringent requirements for the design of garments. Clothing designed to offer UV protection to the upper body must provide coverage from the base of the neck down to the hip and across the shoulders down to three quarters of the upper arm. Clothing designed to offer protection to the lower body (from the waist to below the patella) must similarly provide complete coverage. Ultraviolet protective clothing for which compliance with this standard is claimed must be permanently marked with the number of the European standard and with the designation "UPF+." In the United States, the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists has also proposed a method of determining the UPF of textile materials.One standard document of the American Society for Testing and Materials has been developed to spell out how fabric is to be prepared before submission to UV transmittance testing.Besides, the American Society for Testing and Materials has drafted labeling requirements, in which materials must be tested after laundering, UV exposure, and contact with chlorinated pool water (in the case of swimwear).Further investigation is needed about other qualities and factors of fabrics that may affect the UPF of a textile, to enable the development of an optimal fabric for sun protection. However, textile properties can vary considerably from batch to batch, and small variations in finishing operations (such as tightness of weave) can cause substantial changes in textile UPF. Thus, the validity of a UPF rating for a particular garment must be considered relative to normal production variation. Although adoption of a standard provides opportunities for labeling and marketing of garments, ethical and quality control measures are necessary to guarantee that garments are true to label.PAltmeyerKHoffmannMStückerSkin Cancer and UV Radiation.Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1997.PGiesCRoySToomeyDTomlinsonAmbient solar UVR: personal exposure and protection.J Epidemiol.1999;9:S115-S122.RDummerUOsterwalderUV transmission of summer clothing in Switzerland and Germany.Dermatology.2000;200:81-82.JMMenterBSHollinsRMSayreAAEtamadiIWillisSNGHughesProtection against UV photocarcinogenesis by fabric materials.J Am Acad Dermatol.1994;31:711-716.NBech-ThomsenHCWulfSUllmanXeroderma pigmentosum lesions related to ultraviolet transmittance by clothes.J Am Acad Dermatol.1991;24:365-368.Not AvailableSun protective clothing: evaluation and classification.Sydney, New South Wales: Standards Australia International Ltd; 1996. Australian/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS) 4399.MPailthorpeTextile and sun protection: the current situation.Australas Textiles.1994;14:54-66.HPGiesCRRoyAMcLennanUV protection by clothing: an intercomparison of measurements and methods.Health Phys.1997;73:456-464.HPGiesCRRoyGElliottWZongliUltraviolet radiation protection factors for clothing.Health Phys.1994;67:131-139.LCapjackNKerrRFedosejevsKLHatchNLMarkeeProtection of humans from ultraviolet radiation through the use of textiles: a review.Fam Consumer Sci Res J.1994;23:198-218.CEN–The European Committee for StandardizationTextiles: solar UV protective properties: methods of test for apparel fabrics.Stassart, Brussels: CEN; 1999. PrEN 13758.BLDiffeyThe CIE ultraviolet action spectrum for erythema.In: Mathes R, Sliney D, eds. Measurements of Optical Radiation Hazards. Munich, Germany: Märkl-Druck; 1998:63-67.JLaperreTGambichlerBBöhringerDetermination of the ultraviolet protection factor of textile materials: measurement precision.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.In press.DGStanfordKEGeorgourasMPailthorpeRating clothing for sun protection: current status in Australia.J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol.1997;8:12-17.HPGiesCRRoyGHolmesUltraviolet radiation protection by clothing: comparison of in vivo and in vitro measurements.Radiat Protection Dosimetry.2000;91:247-250.SWMenziesPBLukinsGEGreenoakA comparative study of fabric protection against ultraviolet-induced erythema determined by spectrophotometric and human skin measurements.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.1991;8:157-163.NJLoweTDBourgetSNHughesRMSayreUV protection offered by clothing: an in vitro and in vivo assessment of clothing fabrics.Skin Cancer.1995;10:89-96.TGambichlerAAvermaeteABaderPAltmeyerKHoffmannUltraviolet protection by summer textiles: ultraviolet transmission measurements verified by determination of the minimal erythema dose with solar-simulated radiation.Br J Dermatol.2001;144:484-489.GEGreenoakMPailthorpeSkin protection by clothing from the damaging effects of sunlight.Australas Textiles.1996;16:61.KHoffmannKKasparTGambichlerPAltmeyerIn vitro and in vivo determination of the UV protection factor for lightweight cotton and viscose summer fabrics: a preliminary study.J Am Acad Dermatol.2000;43:1009-1016.JRavishankarBLDiffeyLaboratory testing of UV transmission through fabrics may underestimate protection.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.1997;13:202-203.MMoehrleCGarbeSolar UV-protective properties of textiles [letter].Dermatology.2000;201:82.MPailthorpeApparel textiles and sun protection: a marketing opportunity or a quality control nightmare?Mutat Res.1998;422:175-183.SDavisLCapjackNKerrRFedosejevsClothing as protection from ultraviolet radiation: which fabric is most effective?Int J Dermatol.1997;36:374-379.PCCrewsSKachmannAGBeyerInfluences on UVR transmission of undyed woven fabrics.Textile Chemist Colorist.1999;31:17-26.JRobsonBLDiffeyTextiles and sun protection.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.1990;7:32-34.MSrinivasanBMGatewoodRelationship of dye characteristics to UV protection provided by cotton fabric.Textile Chemist Colorist.2000;32:36-43.UOsterwalderWSchlenkerHRohwerEMartinSSchuhFacts and fiction on ultraviolet protection by clothing.Radiat Protection Dosimetry.2000;91:255-260.RHilfikerWKaufmannGReinertESchmidtImproving sun protection factors of fabrics by applying UV-absorbers.Textile Res J.1996;66:61-70.KHoffmannAHoffmannDHankeSun protection from optimally designed fabrics.Hautarzt.1998;49:10-16.MWedlerBHirtheUV-absorbing micro-additives for synthetic fibers.Chem Fibers Int.1999;49:72.GReinertRHilfikerESchmidtFFusoSonnenschutzeigenschaften textiler Flächen und deren Verbesserung.Textilveredelung.1996;31:227-234.CEckhardtHRohwerUV protector for cotton fabrics.Textile Chemist Colorist.2000;32:21-23.RMoonMPailthorpeEffect of stretch and wetting on the UPF of elastane fabrics.Australas Textiles.1995;15:39-42.MGKimlinAVParisiLRMeldrumEffect of stretch on the ultraviolet spectral transmission of one type of commonly used clothing.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.1999;15:171-174.SASinclairBLDiffeySun protection provided by ladies stockings.Br J Dermatol.1997;136:239-241.AVParisiMGKimlinLMulheranLRMeldrumCRandallField-based measurements of personal erythemal ultraviolet exposure through a common summer garment.Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed.2000;16:134-138.TGambichlerAAvermaetePAltmeyerKHoffmannIn vitro and in vivo measurements of the UV protection of dry and wet textiles.Paper presented at: Tenth Annual Meeting of the Photomedicine Society; March 1, 2001; Washington, DC.APJevticThe sun protective effect of clothing, including beachwear.Australas J Dermatol.1990;31:5-7.DGStanfordKEGeorgourasMTPailthorpeThe effect of laundering on the sun protection afforded by a summer-weight garment.J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol.1995;5:28-39.DGStanfordKEGeorgousMTPailthorpeSun protection afforded by a summer weight garment: effect of wash and wear.Med J Aust.1995;162:422-425.WBobethTextile Faserstoffe: Beschaffenheit und Eigenschaften.Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1993.American Association of Textile Chemists and ColoristsTransmittance or blocking of erythemally weighted ultraviolet radiation through fabrics.AATCC.1998:183.American Society of Testing and MaterialsPreparation of textiles prior to UV transmittance testing.ASTM D.2000:6544.American Society of Testing and MaterialsGuide to labeling of UV protective textiles.ASTM D.2000:6603.KLHatchRSayreBLSlatenDeveloping a standard for sun protective clothing [abstract].Melanoma Res.1996;6(suppl 1):43.KHoffmannUV protective clothing in Europe: recommendation of European Working Party.J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol.1998;11:198-199.RCliftonTesting and labelling of sun protective clothing for children.Radiat Protection Dosimetry.2000;91:251-254.Accepted for publication January 26, 2001.This study was supported in part by grant 07UVB60A/2 from the German Ministry of Science and Technology.Corresponding author and reprints: Thilo Gambichler, MD, Department of Dermatology, Ruhr-University Bochum, Gudrunstrasse 56, 44791 Bochum, Germany (e-mail: t.gambichler@derma.de).
TI - Defined UV Protection by Apparel Textiles
JF - JAMA Dermatology
DO - 10-1001/pubs.Arch Dermatol.-ISSN-0003-987x-137-8-dre10006
DA - 2001-08-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/american-medical-association/defined-uv-protection-by-apparel-textiles-0IyL7Cf3sB
SP - 1089
EP - 1094
VL - 137
IS - 8
DP - DeepDyve
ER -