Sun protection by a summer-weight garment: the effect of washing and wearing
Abstract
Objective To assess the effect of use (washing and wearing) on the photoprotection provided by a cotton fabric. Methods Twenty jersey-knit pure cotton T-shirts were worn for 4-8 hours per week and washed weekly for 10 weeks. Fabric samples taken before and after use were compared. Main outcome measures Fabric ultraviolet protection factor (UPF) was calculated from spectrophotometric ultraviolet radiation transmission data. Changes in fabric structure and hole size were determined for samples from one T-shirt by light microscopy and image analysis. Results UPF increased consistently and significantly after use, from a mean of 19.0 to 40.6. A corresponding reduction in fabric hole area was seen under the light microscope and confirmed on image analysis (from 8.0% to 3.9% of total image area). Conclusion UPF of pure cotton garments may improve after use, at least in the short term. The increase is mostly accounted for by reduction in fabric hole area due to shrinkage.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The increase in UPF from washing is most noticeable after the first wash.
“This effect is most noticeable after the first wash (22)”
From Photoprotection: a Review of the Current and Future Technologies (2010) · cites this paper as [22]
After washing, certain fabrics shrink, decreasing the gaps between individual fibers and making the fabric thicker, thus increasing the UPF.
“After washing, certain fabrics shrink, thereby decreasing the gaps between the individual fibers and making the fabric thicker, thus increasing the UPF.”
From Photoprotection: a Review of the Current and Future Technologies (2010) · cites this paper as [22]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kullavanijaya, P., & Lim, H. W. (2005) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2004.07.063 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Photoprotection: a Review of the Current and Future Technologies
Wang, S. Q., Balagula, Y., & Osterwalder, U. (2010) · Dermatologic Therapy · doi:10.1111/j.1529-8019.2009.01289.x · Cited by 294 · see citing works
Protection against solar ultraviolet radiation
Gies, P. H., Roy, C. R., Toomey, S., & McLennan, A. (1998) · Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis · doi:10.1016/s0027-5107(98)00181-x · Cited by 148 · see citing works
- Authors
- Stanford, D. G., Georgouras, K. E., & Pailthorpe, M. T.
- Affiliations
- Liverpool Hospital (AU)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Venue
- Medical Journal of Australia
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 162
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 422-425
- ISSN
- 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
- 1326-5377
- OpenAlex
- W2340936755
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- The Medical Journal of Australia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Skin Protection and Aging
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Polymers and Plastics › Textile materials and evaluations
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Museology › Fashion and Cultural Textiles
- Keywords
- sun protection, UV protection factor, cotton fabric, t-shirts, fabric shrinkage, photoprotection
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Gossypium, Female, Humans, Laundering, Male, Middle Aged, Protective Clothing, Spectrophotometry, Ultraviolet, Sunburn, Ultraviolet Rays
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
