Only a handful of places left for our September 2026 cohort. Applications close soonApply now →

MSTA
Your future
starts here.

High-frequency

Also known as: d'Arsonval treatment, violet wand facial

High-frequency is a beauty treatment using an electrical device and a gas-filled glass electrode. The electrode is applied directly to the skin or held by the client during an indirect massage treatment. It is commonly offered for oily or blemish-prone skin.

In plain English — This treatment uses a glass electrode connected to an electrical device. Small studies have reported improvements in acne or facial wrinkle scores, but they do not tell us how long results last. The exact device's safety instructions matter, especially for anyone with an implanted electrical device or during pregnancy.

Evidence status

Limited

Established salon use; limited clinical evidence. Small human studies report improvements in facial acne or wrinkle scores, while laboratory work demonstrates antimicrobial activity under culture conditions. The human studies have important design and follow-up limitations; safety restrictions depend on the specific equipment.

What high-frequency is, and the forms encountered#

Beauty-therapy high-frequency uses a powered unit with interchangeable gas-filled glass electrodes. In direct treatment, an electrode is applied to the skin. In indirect treatment, the client holds a designated electrode while the practitioner massages the skin. These are distinct applications described by the manufacturer, not interchangeable steps in a universal protocol.[4]

The subject here is that glass-electrode salon technique. Radiofrequency and RF microneedling have their own equipment, treatment aims and evidence; their findings do not establish the effects of a high-frequency facial wand.[1, 4]i

Use of high-frequency in aesthetic practice#

High-frequency appears in professional facial services, particularly for oily or blemish-prone skin, and indirect applications are described as part of massage. Those uses are documented in commercial equipment instructions. Human research has also examined facial acne and wrinkles, described below.[4][2][3]

Selection starts with the actual unit’s intended use, training requirements and contraindications. A treatment name alone does not identify the electrode, output or restrictions. The manufacturer’s instructions govern operation; no settings or treatment schedule are provided here.[4, 5]

Contraindications and cautions#

Check implanted electrical devices before considering treatment. Carlton’s manual lists pacemakers and electrical implants as contraindications. It also lists pregnancy or breastfeeding and damaged or infected skin. These are the manufacturer’s restrictions for its system; the listing is not a clinical estimate of harm in each excluded group.[4, 5]

Other equipment instructions use different wording, including prior medical consultation for implants, epilepsy, pregnancy, open or irritated skin and additional specified conditions. Do not substitute another manufacturer’s checklist for the one supplied with the equipment in use. A research report involving acne does not override a device’s restrictions on the condition of the skin.[4, 5]

Inspect equipment and electrodes, follow handling requirements and keep flammable materials away from the treatment. Where the device produces ozone, ventilation and exposure controls belong in the workplace risk assessment. HSE’s cited occupational guidance applies to Great Britain; it is not a four-nation cosmetic-treatment licensing statement.[4, 5][1, 6]i

Clinical uses and the evidence behind them#

Facial acne

A 2018 study compared high-frequency with a ferulic-acid preparation in 60 adult women with facial acne, 30 per group, over five weeks. Both groups also used gentle cleanser and moisturiser. In the high-frequency arm, mean inflammatory lesions fell from 7.0 (95% CI 5.1–8.9) to 0.8 (95% CI 0.2–1.3). Those intervals describe the two time-point means, not the treatment’s effect relative to a control.[2]

The finding is a clinical signal, with important limits: the paper asserts random assignment without describing it adequately, has no sham or untreated arm, and begins with different inflammatory counts between groups. It supplies no longer-term follow-up. No funding or conflict declaration was located in the full paper. The result therefore does not isolate the contribution of high-frequency from accompanying care.[2]i

Facial wrinkles

A 2024 study’s original abstract reports improved nasolabial and periorbital wrinkle scores in 26 participants aged 50–60 over eight weeks. No control group is described, and the authors call for controlled studies with more objective measurements. The full paper was inaccessible: participants’ phototypes, complete device details, funding and conflicts could not be checked. This is an encouraging before–after observation, not a comparative estimate of benefit.[3]

Selecting a client and setting expectations#

First identify whether the concern is uncomplicated cosmetic appearance or a condition requiring medical care. For blemishes, use the acne vulgaris entry to distinguish supportive skincare from management of persistent inflammatory disease. For lines and texture, the photoageing entry provides the wider context.[7]i

Record relevant medical history, skin condition and the exact equipment’s restrictions. Explain the intended cosmetic aim and the human findings in plain terms: small studies report changes, but they do not establish a reliable duration of benefit. Agree how an unexpected reaction or deterioration will be handled before treatment.[2][3][4, 5]

Adverse effects and their management#

Equipment manuals require attention to skin reactions and electrical or electrode handling. Unexpected discomfort or an adverse skin reaction is a reason to stop and follow the unit’s instructions, not a reason to increase exposure. Damaged equipment or glass should be taken out of use.[4, 5]

Ozone exposure is a separate respiratory and eye-safety consideration. It is a reactive oxidant, and HSE guidance describes irritation and the need for exposure assessment and control. If an exposure causes eye or breathing symptoms, stop the exposure and obtain appropriate medical assistance; significant breathing difficulty requires urgent assessment. The HSE document does not supply an injury rate for salon wands.[1, 6]i

Referral and scope boundaries#

Uncertain diagnosis and nodulocystic acne belong with a medical practitioner. Acne associated with scarring, persistent pigmentary change or substantial psychological distress also merits referral according to the relevant NICE recommendations. Repeated cosmetic sessions should not postpone that assessment.[7]i

Where medical history conflicts with the equipment instructions, resolve the issue before treatment. A general statement that someone can receive a facial is not a substitute for checking a contraindicated electrical device.[4, 5]

Mechanism of action#

The gas-filled electrode provides the interface for the electrical treatment. A 2022 in-vitro study tested one named Signstek device with a helium-filled electrode against microbial cultures. Colony counts fell after exposure, including for Cutibacterium acnes. Skin-flora samples obtained from one person were also tested on culture plates, not by treating that person’s face. The authors reported no funding or conflicts.[1]

A separate experiment with the device detected ozone generation. This helps explain interest in antimicrobial effects, while also making room conditions and exposure relevant to safety.[1, 6]i

Commonly misstated claims#

“It kills acne bacteria, so it cures acne”

Claim heard: laboratory antimicrobial activity establishes clinical acne clearance.

Literature finding: the 2022 experiment measured microbial colonies on agar, not acne lesions in people. The human acne comparison is a separate, small study with the design limitations described above.[1]i[2]i

Supported statement: high-frequency has laboratory antimicrobial activity and a limited human clinical signal; the culture experiment does not demonstrate an acne cure.[1]i

“One electrode colour is clinically better for acne or ageing”

Claim heard: the colour of a glowing electrode predicts a superior clinical result.

Literature finding: no direct human head-to-head trial establishing superior acne or anti-ageing outcomes from one glow colour was located in the targeted search completed on 16 September 2026.[no source found]

Supported statement:choose compatible electrodes for the manufacturer’s stated purpose; a promise of colour-specific clinical superiority remains unverified.

“Improved wrinkle scores prove new collagen”

Claim heard: a visible change in wrinkles demonstrates that the treatment builds dermal collagen.

Literature finding: the retrieved 2024 abstract reports wrinkle assessments, not a measured change in dermal collagen. The complete methods were unavailable.[3]i

Supported statement: the abstract supports a preliminary observation about wrinkle appearance; it does not establish a collagen-building mechanism.[3]i

Areas of remaining uncertainty#

  • Durability: the acne and wrinkle reports do not establish sustained benefit after treatment ends. Avoid promising a defined maintenance interval from these studies.[2]i[3]
  • Transfer between devices and clients: incomplete equipment and phototype reporting restricts generalisation. Match the device and the person to its own instructions rather than assuming every wand has the same evidence.[2]i[4, 5]

Frequently asked questions#

Is it the same as a radiofrequency facial?

The subject here is the gas-filled glass-electrode technique used directly or during indirect massage. Radiofrequency has a separate device and evidence context; one treatment’s studies should not be used to explain the other’s results.[1, 4]i

Can a client with a pacemaker have it?

Not with the Carlton system described in the cited manual: pacemakers and electrical implants are listed contraindications. Always consult the exact unit’s instructions.[4, 5]

Where does it fit for an acne-prone client?

It is offered in cosmetic facial services, and a small human comparison has reported improvement. Persistent, scarring, nodulocystic or psychologically distressing acne needs the appropriate medical pathway alongside supportive skincare.[2][7]i

References#

Each source is graded by evidence tier. Tier 4 material (manufacturer documents, expert consensus, practitioner experience) is useful for protocol and context, and is never presented as equivalent to independent clinical evidence.

  1. Frommherz L, Reinholz M, Gürtler A, Stadler PC, Kaemmerer T, French L, Clanner-Engelshofen BM. High-frequency devices effect in vitro: promissing approach in the treatment of acne vulgaris? An Bras Dermatol. 2022;97(6):729–734. doi:10.1016/j.abd.2021.09.015. PMID:36109271.In vitroTier 3Supports: Original full XML; named Signstek device with helium-filled electrode, microbial agar experiments and separate ozone-generation experiment. Human skin-flora isolates were tested in culture, not by treating a person's face. No clinical acne or wrinkle outcome.Funding / interest: Authors report no financial support and no conflicts of interest.
  2. Kamm A, Załęska I. The Effect of Ferulic Acid and D`Arsonwal's High Frequency Currents Activity over the Number of Exanthema among Adult Women. J Med Clin Res Rev. 2018;2(4):1–7.Tier 2Supports: Original full paper; 60 adult women with facial acne, 30 per arm, five-week comparison of high-frequency with a ferulic-acid preparation. Random assignment asserted without adequate procedural detail; no sham or untreated arm and a baseline inflammatory-lesion imbalance. Separate time-point means and confidence intervals retained.Funding / interest: No funding or conflict declaration located in the full paper; independence cannot be assumed.
  3. Dos Santos AKF, Martignago CCS, de Andrade ALM, Assis L, Pessoa RS, Costa DA, Dos Santos L, Tim C. A clinical study on the efficacy of high frequency therapy on nasolabial and periorbital wrinkles. J Cosmet Laser Ther. 2024;26(5–8):114–121. doi:10.1080/14764172.2024.2427018. PMID:39542028.Tier 3Supports: Original abstract; 26 participants aged 50–60 with facial nasolabial and periorbital wrinkles, eight-week before–after assessment. No control group described; authors call for controlled studies and more objective measurements. Full text was inaccessible.Funding / interest: Funding and author conflicts unavailable in the retrieved abstract; no independence assumption. Full device details and participants' phototypes were also unavailable.
  4. Carlton Professional. High Frequency Reference Manual. Undated. Accessed 16 September 2026.Tier 4Supports: Branded manual; direct and indirect treatment identity, salon uses, equipment handling, contraindications and adverse-reaction instructions. Used for this manufacturer's description and restrictions, not independent efficacy evidence or its unsupported biological claims.Funding / interest: Manufacturer documentation with a direct commercial interest in the treatment equipment.
  5. Spa & Equipment. Multifunction facial equipment manual, high-frequency section, pp. 15–16. Undated. Accessed 16 September 2026.Tier 4Supports: Supplier-hosted equipment manual; flammable-material precaution and medical consultation cautions for selected implants, epilepsy, pregnancy, open or irritated skin and other stated conditions. Instructions are device-specific.Funding / interest: Commercial equipment-supplier documentation; no independent clinical evaluation is presented.
  6. Health and Safety Executive. Ozone: Health hazards and control measures. EH38, third edition. 2014.Tier 1Supports: Original GB occupational guidance on ozone's oxidant properties, respiratory and eye effects, exposure assessment and controls. Not a clinical evaluation or licensing determination for a cosmetic device; no numerical exposure limit is used here.Funding / interest: Public occupational health and safety guidance from HSE; no commercial sponsorship identified.
  7. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Acne vulgaris: management. NG198. Updated 3 August 2026. Recommendations 1.2 and 1.4.Tier 1Supports: Original current NICE HTML; skincare and referral recommendations, including diagnostic uncertainty, nodulocystic acne, scarring, persistent pigmentary changes and psychological distress. Not a general UK operator-licensing source.Funding / interest: Publicly developed NICE clinical guideline; committee interests are managed through NICE's guideline process.