Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2010
Review of methods used for quantifying excess water in over-hydrated skin using evaporimetry.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fader Mandy, Clarke-O'Neill Sinead, Wong W K Rebecca, Runeman Bo, Farbrot Anne, Cottenden Alan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Advances in diapers and skin barrier products are often aimed at reducing water penetration of the skin to prevent diaper dermatitis and evaporimetry has commonly been measured to quantify excess water in the skin. The aim of this study was to critically review the methods used to measure water vapour flux density (WVFD) using evaporimetry in order to identify a standardised methodology.
METHODS: We used MEDLINE (1980-2008) and hand searching to identify published papers that used evaporimetry to measure WVFD when the skin has been exposed to water/saline/urine. We compared the papers with respect to subjects, sites, methods of hydrating the skin, the conditions of logging, timing and analysing the evaporimetry data.
RESULTS: We identified 10 papers. Methods and techniques for measuring WVFD and analysing data varied considerably between studies and it was not possible to identify a standardised method. The main sources of error and variation are discussed.
CONCLUSION: Little work has been carried out to establish the optimum methods and techniques needed to minimise variation in measurements of WVFD using evaporimetery. There is a need to develop more robust, standardised methods and to demonstrate their reliability for further work.
METHODS: We used MEDLINE (1980-2008) and hand searching to identify published papers that used evaporimetry to measure WVFD when the skin has been exposed to water/saline/urine. We compared the papers with respect to subjects, sites, methods of hydrating the skin, the conditions of logging, timing and analysing the evaporimetry data.
RESULTS: We identified 10 papers. Methods and techniques for measuring WVFD and analysing data varied considerably between studies and it was not possible to identify a standardised method. The main sources of error and variation are discussed.
CONCLUSION: Little work has been carried out to establish the optimum methods and techniques needed to minimise variation in measurements of WVFD using evaporimetery. There is a need to develop more robust, standardised methods and to demonstrate their reliability for further work.