What the survey found
The sample was 1,279 women. The release says they were ages "23 to 781," which is a typo for 23 to 78, so treat the age range as approximate until a corrected version appears.
The headline number is 74%: those women said they became more interested in aesthetic treatments after entering perimenopause or menopause. Sixty-eight percent said they like the idea of getting aesthetic and hormone care in the same practice. Eighty-five percent said it matters that their aesthetic provider understands perimenopause and menopause. Of that group, 63.6% called it "very important."
The release also reports that 39% had already moved toward regenerative aesthetic options since their hormonal shift. Fifty-five percent expressed interest in peptide injections, and 61% said they would be more likely to book a treatment that features peptides.
On results, the numbers are harder for an owner to shrug off. Among women who had prior treatments, more than one-third said those treatments work less well than before perimenopause or menopause. Nearly half said results do not last as long. Loss of firmness topped the concern list at 74%. Fine lines and wrinkles followed at 66%, then jawline and neck changes at 47% and facial volume loss at 46%.
What it means for practices
Our read: the demand signal is real enough to plan around, but the survey does not prove a revenue shift. Respondents said they want provider expertise. They did not say how much they would pay for it, or whether they would switch clinics.
The more useful finding for a practice is the durability complaint. A patient who says her results last less time is telling you the treatment interval or the product mix may need to change. That is a consult conversation, and it belongs in intake questions, not just in a marketing campaign.
The integrated-care pitch is the part that will draw the most debate. Putting hormone care in the same building as injectables raises questions about scope of practice, referral relationships and what your state board expects. The release does not address any of that.
What owners can do
Start by asking intake questions about menopausal status and when the patient noticed changes in firmness, volume or treatment response. The survey gives you a list of concerns to check against. Use it as a checklist, not a script.
If you want to offer peptide injections, check what your state permits and what your supplier can document. The release reports patient interest in peptides, but it does not give safety data, dosing or evidence for any specific peptide product. Do not let a survey percentage stand in for product evidence.
Think about provider education now. Revance says it is building "dedicated provider education and initiatives," and it is pointing practices to its booths at the 2026 ASDS Annual Meeting. Booth 211 is for Revance, and Booth 311 is for Revance Medical Affairs. Ask what the education covers, who presents it and whether it is accredited or promotional. Those answers tell you whether the content is clinical training or a sales funnel.
Finally, review what you are already selling into this group. The release names DAXXIFY, the Teoxane RHA Collection and SkinPen. The safety text in the release is product-specific, and each product carries its own label. DAXXIFY's approved use in the release is temporary improvement of moderate to severe frown lines between the eyebrows in adults. The RHA fillers carry indications for specific facial areas. SkinPen is a microneedling device. None of these is approved or indicated here for menopause-related skin changes, and the release does not claim otherwise. Match what you promote to the label.
What we don't know yet
The release does not say how the 1,279 women were recruited, whether they were weighted to match the U.S. population, or how the survey defined perimenopause. It does not publish question wording. It also does not say whether the respondents were patients of medspas or general consumers, which changes what the 74% means for your chart.
No clinical outcome data appears in the release. The dermatologist quote from Dr. Ellen Marmur describes changes she sees in practice, and it is useful context, but it is not a study. The release does not say what share of women had received treatments in the first place, so the "less effective" finding has an unknown denominator.
Business information, not medical or legal advice. Verify regulatory status at FDA.gov.
