Adolescent health brief
Body Art (Body Piercing and Tattooing) among Undergraduate University Students: “Then and Now”

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.09.014Get rights and content

Abstract

Purpose

To survey the prevalence of body art and incidence of medical complications among university students comparing results in 2001 and 2006.

Methods

Students reported body piercings and tattoos and occurrence of medical complications.

Results

Prevalence of body piercing was 51% and tattooing 22%. Piercing medical complication incidence was 19%. No tattooing medical complications occurred.

Conclusions

Body art is prevalent among undergraduate university students, with prevalence essentially unchanged during two consecutive 5-year samples. Medical complications occur frequently among those with piercings.

Section snippets

Subjects and Methods

Our survey questionnaire was offered on a voluntary anonymous basis to undergraduate students during various classes and athletic team meetings. To assure a high response rate, the survey was brief and nonintrusive concerning personal information, easy to complete (requiring less than 3 minutes), and administered at the beginning of class or team meeting sessions with institutional review board approval.

Survey results were entered into a statistical program. When a subject omitted a response

Results

Among 661 students, comprising 18.8% of total campus enrollment, 98.3% completed the survey. Forty-one percent were male and 59% female, reflecting the gender proportion among our students (43.7% male, 56.3% female). We compared subjects by age, height, weight, and body mass index. No significant changes were found in distribution of student demographic variables between 2001 and 2006 (Table 1).

Ninety-six of 266 (36%) male students and 238 of 384 (62%) female students were ever pierced (p =

Discussion

Our 2001 survey of body art prevalence found 51% of students pierced and 23% tattooed. Body art application was consistent in the five class years of students studied, and we concluded that piercing and tattooing were “mainstream” among the 18–23-year-old population [1]. Our current survey reports quite similar results. Since 2001, several published reports of body art prevalence [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] generally confirm our findings.

Although there are numerous anecdotal reports of medical

References (9)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (76)

  • Tattoos and Piercings in Female Adolescents and Young Adults

    2023, Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
  • Health risks for body pierced community: a systematic review

    2022, Public Health
    Citation Excerpt :

    In these articles, adverse effects were very heterogeneous and include bleeding,49–55 pain,1,50,52,56–58 deformity,51 swelling,1,52,56,57 oedema,54 fever and headache.52 Authors reported also local irritation/inflammation,49,52,56,59,60 acne,60 mucosal atrophy,51 skin tearing,54 lymphadenopathy58 and swollen glands.49 In the setting of sensitisation phenomena, occurrence of itching,52,60 allergy/sensitisation,49,52,55,62,63 contact eczema and atopic dermatitis60 was described.

  • Perceptions by Adult Patients With Type 1 and 2 Diabetes of Current and Advanced Technologies of Blood Glucose Monitoring: A Prospective Study

    2019, Canadian Journal of Diabetes
    Citation Excerpt :

    It was concluded that young, highly educated females tend to wear contact lenses more often for cosmetic reasons. Tattoos are perceived by females as a body art; nonetheless, previous studies did not report any significant difference between gender and the prevalence of tattoos (28,29). Furthermore, the influence of age and ethnicity on device acceptability was also investigated.

  • Attitudes towards Tattoos among Spanish Health Science Students

    2022, European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text