Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting
Summary Background Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin. Objectives To assess t...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of dermatology (1951) 2014-10, Vol.171 (4), p.813-818 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 818 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 813 |
| container_title | British journal of dermatology (1951) |
| container_volume | 171 |
| creator | Sadhra, S.S. Kurmi, O.P. Mohammed, N.I. Foulds, I.S. |
| description | Summary
Background
Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin.
Objectives
To assess the practicability of using skin occlusion testing in a workplace as a method to determine whether PCs applied under controlled conditions can reduce skin damage against known irritants. This study also compares two methods of skin evaluation: clinical dermatological assessment and bioengineering techniques.
Methods
Daily occlusion testing for 1 h (over two consecutive weeks) was conducted in an engineering company on the volar forearm of 21 healthy volunteer engineers with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and a PC that was used on site. The engineers conducted their normal work activities during the occlusion testing period. The skin areas tested were assessed using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), Chroma Meter and by visual dermatological scoring.
Results
Testing with PC and SLS together showed that PC does not prevent irritant contact dermatitis but significantly reduced skin damage compared with SLS alone (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/bjd.13108 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1613951644</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2311142969</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4218-1f9a88b42f146c7026514885d0a205d1dcb347687d1fba90af7a2744055ebc1f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10E1rFDEYB_Agit1WD34BGRBBD9PmfTLetHWrsr4cVjzGZzKJZJudjMkMdb-9sbutIJhLSPg9L_wRekLwKSnnrNv0p4QRrO6hBWFS1JQwdh8tMMZNjVvJjtBxzhuMCcMCP0RHlCvCpaAL9P1LipM1k49DBc7F1Nu-6naVicOUYgjlBeMYvIEbEl0FVQcpeZsqkyxsX5WPPM39rvKlQ3Ud09UYwNgq22nyw49H6IGDkO3jw32Cvi7frs_f1avPl-_PX69qwylRNXEtKNVx6spipsFUCsKVEj0GikVPetMx3kjV9MR10GJwDdCGcyyE7Qxx7AS92PcdU_w52zzprc_GhgCDjXPWRBLWCiI5L_TZP3QT5zSU7TRlJU9OW9kW9XKvTIo5J-v0mPwW0k4TrP_Erkvs-ib2Yp8eOs7d1vZ38jbnAp4fAGQDwSUYjM9_nVKKYSyLO9u7ax_s7v8T9ZsPF7ej632Fz5P9dVcB6UrLhjVCf_t0qddLuVzT9Up_ZL8BVjamZg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2311142969</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Sadhra, S.S. ; Kurmi, O.P. ; Mohammed, N.I. ; Foulds, I.S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sadhra, S.S. ; Kurmi, O.P. ; Mohammed, N.I. ; Foulds, I.S.</creatorcontrib><description>Summary
Background
Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin.
Objectives
To assess the practicability of using skin occlusion testing in a workplace as a method to determine whether PCs applied under controlled conditions can reduce skin damage against known irritants. This study also compares two methods of skin evaluation: clinical dermatological assessment and bioengineering techniques.
Methods
Daily occlusion testing for 1 h (over two consecutive weeks) was conducted in an engineering company on the volar forearm of 21 healthy volunteer engineers with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and a PC that was used on site. The engineers conducted their normal work activities during the occlusion testing period. The skin areas tested were assessed using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), Chroma Meter and by visual dermatological scoring.
Results
Testing with PC and SLS together showed that PC does not prevent irritant contact dermatitis but significantly reduced skin damage compared with SLS alone (P < 0·01). The changes in skin were evident earlier with the biophysical measurements when compared with the dermatological assessment.
Conclusions
Occlusion testing is a useful method for assessing the potential effectiveness of protective creams and can be used in a workplace without affecting work practices. TEWL and the Chroma Meter provide useful objective information and should be used in combination with dermatological examinations.
What's already known about this topic?
Barrier (protective) creams are used widely in industrial workplace settings to prevent irritant contact dermatitis but evidence for their effectiveness is inconclusive.
What does this study add?
This study demonstrates that the potential effectiveness of protective creams can be evaluated using occlusion testing in the workplace.
This study also evaluates the use of bioengineering techniques alongside dermatological assessment when assessing skin changes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0963</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2133</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/bjd.13108</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24814652</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJDEAZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject><![CDATA[Administration, Cutaneous ; Adult ; Anti-Inflammatory Agents - administration & dosage ; Biological and medical sciences ; Contact dermatitis ; Controlled conditions ; Dermatitis ; Dermatitis, Irritant - prevention & control ; Dermatitis, Occupational - prevention & control ; Dermatologic Agents - administration & dosage ; Dermatology ; Drug Combinations ; Drug Interactions ; Erythema - prevention & control ; Forearm ; Humans ; Humidity ; Kaolin - administration & dosage ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Miscellaneous ; Occlusion ; Occupational medicine ; Oils - administration & dosage ; Patch Tests ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Skin Cream - administration & dosage ; Skin tests ; Sodium ; Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate - administration & dosage ; Sodium lauryl sulfate ; Surface-Active Agents - administration & dosage ; Temperature ; Water loss ; Water Loss, Insensible ; Waxes ; Workplace]]></subject><ispartof>British journal of dermatology (1951), 2014-10, Vol.171 (4), p.813-818</ispartof><rights>2014 British Association of Dermatologists</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2014 British Association of Dermatologists.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 British Association of Dermatologists</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4218-1f9a88b42f146c7026514885d0a205d1dcb347687d1fba90af7a2744055ebc1f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4218-1f9a88b42f146c7026514885d0a205d1dcb347687d1fba90af7a2744055ebc1f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fbjd.13108$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fbjd.13108$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28883006$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24814652$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sadhra, S.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurmi, O.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammed, N.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foulds, I.S.</creatorcontrib><title>Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting</title><title>British journal of dermatology (1951)</title><addtitle>Br J Dermatol</addtitle><description>Summary
Background
Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin.
Objectives
To assess the practicability of using skin occlusion testing in a workplace as a method to determine whether PCs applied under controlled conditions can reduce skin damage against known irritants. This study also compares two methods of skin evaluation: clinical dermatological assessment and bioengineering techniques.
Methods
Daily occlusion testing for 1 h (over two consecutive weeks) was conducted in an engineering company on the volar forearm of 21 healthy volunteer engineers with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and a PC that was used on site. The engineers conducted their normal work activities during the occlusion testing period. The skin areas tested were assessed using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), Chroma Meter and by visual dermatological scoring.
Results
Testing with PC and SLS together showed that PC does not prevent irritant contact dermatitis but significantly reduced skin damage compared with SLS alone (P < 0·01). The changes in skin were evident earlier with the biophysical measurements when compared with the dermatological assessment.
Conclusions
Occlusion testing is a useful method for assessing the potential effectiveness of protective creams and can be used in a workplace without affecting work practices. TEWL and the Chroma Meter provide useful objective information and should be used in combination with dermatological examinations.
What's already known about this topic?
Barrier (protective) creams are used widely in industrial workplace settings to prevent irritant contact dermatitis but evidence for their effectiveness is inconclusive.
What does this study add?
This study demonstrates that the potential effectiveness of protective creams can be evaluated using occlusion testing in the workplace.
This study also evaluates the use of bioengineering techniques alongside dermatological assessment when assessing skin changes.</description><subject>Administration, Cutaneous</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anti-Inflammatory Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Contact dermatitis</subject><subject>Controlled conditions</subject><subject>Dermatitis</subject><subject>Dermatitis, Irritant - prevention & control</subject><subject>Dermatitis, Occupational - prevention & control</subject><subject>Dermatologic Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Dermatology</subject><subject>Drug Combinations</subject><subject>Drug Interactions</subject><subject>Erythema - prevention & control</subject><subject>Forearm</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Humidity</subject><subject>Kaolin - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Occlusion</subject><subject>Occupational medicine</subject><subject>Oils - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Patch Tests</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Skin Cream - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Skin tests</subject><subject>Sodium</subject><subject>Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Sodium lauryl sulfate</subject><subject>Surface-Active Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Temperature</subject><subject>Water loss</subject><subject>Water Loss, Insensible</subject><subject>Waxes</subject><subject>Workplace</subject><issn>0007-0963</issn><issn>1365-2133</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp10E1rFDEYB_Agit1WD34BGRBBD9PmfTLetHWrsr4cVjzGZzKJZJudjMkMdb-9sbutIJhLSPg9L_wRekLwKSnnrNv0p4QRrO6hBWFS1JQwdh8tMMZNjVvJjtBxzhuMCcMCP0RHlCvCpaAL9P1LipM1k49DBc7F1Nu-6naVicOUYgjlBeMYvIEbEl0FVQcpeZsqkyxsX5WPPM39rvKlQ3Ud09UYwNgq22nyw49H6IGDkO3jw32Cvi7frs_f1avPl-_PX69qwylRNXEtKNVx6spipsFUCsKVEj0GikVPetMx3kjV9MR10GJwDdCGcyyE7Qxx7AS92PcdU_w52zzprc_GhgCDjXPWRBLWCiI5L_TZP3QT5zSU7TRlJU9OW9kW9XKvTIo5J-v0mPwW0k4TrP_Erkvs-ib2Yp8eOs7d1vZ38jbnAp4fAGQDwSUYjM9_nVKKYSyLO9u7ax_s7v8T9ZsPF7ej632Fz5P9dVcB6UrLhjVCf_t0qddLuVzT9Up_ZL8BVjamZg</recordid><startdate>201410</startdate><enddate>201410</enddate><creator>Sadhra, S.S.</creator><creator>Kurmi, O.P.</creator><creator>Mohammed, N.I.</creator><creator>Foulds, I.S.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley-Blackwell</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201410</creationdate><title>Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting</title><author>Sadhra, S.S. ; Kurmi, O.P. ; Mohammed, N.I. ; Foulds, I.S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4218-1f9a88b42f146c7026514885d0a205d1dcb347687d1fba90af7a2744055ebc1f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Administration, Cutaneous</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anti-Inflammatory Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Contact dermatitis</topic><topic>Controlled conditions</topic><topic>Dermatitis</topic><topic>Dermatitis, Irritant - prevention & control</topic><topic>Dermatitis, Occupational - prevention & control</topic><topic>Dermatologic Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Dermatology</topic><topic>Drug Combinations</topic><topic>Drug Interactions</topic><topic>Erythema - prevention & control</topic><topic>Forearm</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Humidity</topic><topic>Kaolin - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Occlusion</topic><topic>Occupational medicine</topic><topic>Oils - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Patch Tests</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Skin Cream - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Skin tests</topic><topic>Sodium</topic><topic>Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Sodium lauryl sulfate</topic><topic>Surface-Active Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Temperature</topic><topic>Water loss</topic><topic>Water Loss, Insensible</topic><topic>Waxes</topic><topic>Workplace</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sadhra, S.S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurmi, O.P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mohammed, N.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foulds, I.S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of dermatology (1951)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sadhra, S.S.</au><au>Kurmi, O.P.</au><au>Mohammed, N.I.</au><au>Foulds, I.S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting</atitle><jtitle>British journal of dermatology (1951)</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Dermatol</addtitle><date>2014-10</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>171</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>813</spage><epage>818</epage><pages>813-818</pages><issn>0007-0963</issn><eissn>1365-2133</eissn><coden>BJDEAZ</coden><abstract>Summary
Background
Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin.
Objectives
To assess the practicability of using skin occlusion testing in a workplace as a method to determine whether PCs applied under controlled conditions can reduce skin damage against known irritants. This study also compares two methods of skin evaluation: clinical dermatological assessment and bioengineering techniques.
Methods
Daily occlusion testing for 1 h (over two consecutive weeks) was conducted in an engineering company on the volar forearm of 21 healthy volunteer engineers with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and a PC that was used on site. The engineers conducted their normal work activities during the occlusion testing period. The skin areas tested were assessed using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), Chroma Meter and by visual dermatological scoring.
Results
Testing with PC and SLS together showed that PC does not prevent irritant contact dermatitis but significantly reduced skin damage compared with SLS alone (P < 0·01). The changes in skin were evident earlier with the biophysical measurements when compared with the dermatological assessment.
Conclusions
Occlusion testing is a useful method for assessing the potential effectiveness of protective creams and can be used in a workplace without affecting work practices. TEWL and the Chroma Meter provide useful objective information and should be used in combination with dermatological examinations.
What's already known about this topic?
Barrier (protective) creams are used widely in industrial workplace settings to prevent irritant contact dermatitis but evidence for their effectiveness is inconclusive.
What does this study add?
This study demonstrates that the potential effectiveness of protective creams can be evaluated using occlusion testing in the workplace.
This study also evaluates the use of bioengineering techniques alongside dermatological assessment when assessing skin changes.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>24814652</pmid><doi>10.1111/bjd.13108</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0007-0963 |
| ispartof | British journal of dermatology (1951), 2014-10, Vol.171 (4), p.813-818 |
| issn | 0007-0963 1365-2133 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1613951644 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Administration, Cutaneous Adult Anti-Inflammatory Agents - administration & dosage Biological and medical sciences Contact dermatitis Controlled conditions Dermatitis Dermatitis, Irritant - prevention & control Dermatitis, Occupational - prevention & control Dermatologic Agents - administration & dosage Dermatology Drug Combinations Drug Interactions Erythema - prevention & control Forearm Humans Humidity Kaolin - administration & dosage Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Miscellaneous Occlusion Occupational medicine Oils - administration & dosage Patch Tests Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Skin Cream - administration & dosage Skin tests Sodium Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate - administration & dosage Sodium lauryl sulfate Surface-Active Agents - administration & dosage Temperature Water loss Water Loss, Insensible Waxes Workplace |
| title | Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T08%3A03%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Protection%20afforded%20by%20controlled%20application%20of%20a%20barrier%20cream:%20a%20study%20in%20a%20workplace%20setting&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20dermatology%20(1951)&rft.au=Sadhra,%20S.S.&rft.date=2014-10&rft.volume=171&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=813&rft.epage=818&rft.pages=813-818&rft.issn=0007-0963&rft.eissn=1365-2133&rft.coden=BJDEAZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/bjd.13108&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2311142969%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2311142969&rft_id=info:pmid/24814652&rfr_iscdi=true |