International guidelines for the in vivo assessment of skin properties in non-clinical settings: Part 2. transepidermal water loss and skin hydration

Background There is an emerging perspective that it is not sufficient to just assess skin exposure to physical and chemical stressors in workplaces, but that it is also important to assess the condition, i.e. skin barrier function of the exposed skin at the time of exposure. The workplace environmen...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Skin research and technology Vol. 19; no. 3; pp. 265 - 278
Main Authors: Plessis, Johan du, Stefaniak, Aleksandr, Eloff, Fritz, John, Swen, Agner, Tove, Chou, Tzu-Chieh, Nixon, Rosemary, Steiner, Markus, Franken, Anja, Kudla, Irena, Holness, Linn
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.08.2013
John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Subjects:
ISSN:0909-752X, 1600-0846, 1600-0846
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background There is an emerging perspective that it is not sufficient to just assess skin exposure to physical and chemical stressors in workplaces, but that it is also important to assess the condition, i.e. skin barrier function of the exposed skin at the time of exposure. The workplace environment, representing a non‐clinical environment, can be highly variable and difficult to control, thereby presenting unique measurement challenges not typically encountered in clinical settings. Methods An expert working group convened a workshop as part of the 5th International Conference on Occupational and Environmental Exposure of Skin to Chemicals (OEESC) to develop basic guidelines and best practices (based on existing clinical guidelines, published data, and own experiences) for the in vivo measurement of transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and skin hydration in non‐clinical settings with specific reference to the workplace as a worst‐case scenario. Results Key elements of these guidelines are: (i) to minimize or recognize, to the extent feasible, the influences of relevant endogenous‐, exogenous‐, environmental‐ and measurement/instrumentation‐related factors; (ii) to measure TEWL with a closed‐chamber type instrument; (iii) report results as a difference or percent change (rather than absolute values); and (iv) accurately report any notable deviations from this guidelines. Conclusion It is anticipated that these guidelines will promote consistent data reporting, which will facilitate inter‐comparison of study results.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-S9THXC4T-H
istex:54BC4E0F8D3097473C25CD3AE51E9FECD5D66EA0
ArticleID:SRT12037
NIOSH
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0909-752X
1600-0846
1600-0846
DOI:10.1111/srt.12037