Findings from the Great British and Northern Ireland Botulinum Toxin Survey: treatment outcomes, patient experience and regulations from a cross-sectional survey
posted on 2025-09-26, 08:57authored byLee Smith, Jose Francisco Lopez-Gil, Julia Gawronska, Yvonne Barnett, Laurie Butler, Helen Keyes, Dong Keon Yon, Damiano Pizzol, Masoud Rahmati, Roshan Ravindran
<p dir="ltr">Background: Given rising demand for Botulinum toxin (BoNT) treatments and limited data on safety, ethics, and regulation, a national survey explored experiences with cosmetic BoNT in the United Kingdon (UK).</p><p dir="ltr">Objectives: To conduct a national observational survey with the aim to capture real-world experiences of cosmetic BoNT in the UK.</p><p dir="ltr">Methods: A cross-sectional online survey gathered data on experiences with cosmetic BoNT injections across the UK. Participation was open to adults (≥18 years) who had received cosmetic BoNT treatment.</p><p dir="ltr">Results: A total of 919 participants completed the survey and were predominantly female, white, and had a high household income. Commonly reported acute complications were bruising/swelling (26.1%), and headache (24.7%). Commonly reported long-term complication were BoNT resistance (2.9%), social withdrawal (2.7%), nerve damage (2.5%), and dry eyes/vision problems (2.5%). In total, 66% stated their treatment was administered by a prescriber, 28% said it was not. Among those treated by a non-prescriber, 40% reported that a prescriber was present during the consultation, 42% said no prescriber was present, and 17% were unsure. Surprisingly a few had not signed a consent form (8%), 11% were not informed of treatment risks and 18% were not told how to respond to complications. A large majority expressed support for enhanced oversight, with 57.8% favouring significantly stricter regulation, and 31.3% somewhat stricter regulation.</p><p dir="ltr">Conclusions: Cosmetic BoNT can offer high satisfaction and a favourable safety profile when administered appropriately. However, findings highlight key vulnerabilities: inconsistent practitioner qualifications, gaps in informed consent, insufficient complication support, and weak regulation.</p>