Contact dermatitis · 2013
Protective creams fail to prevent solvent-induced cumulative skin irritation - results of a randomized double-blind study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Schliemann Sibylle, Kleesz Peter, Elsner Peter
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Occupational skin contact with lipophilic substances is a risk factor for the development of irritant hand dermatitis. Skin protection creams form part of the personal protective equipment, and some are claimed to protect against lipophilic irritants. However, their benefit against solvents is under debate.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of barrier creams claimed to protect against lipophilic irritants in a newly developed repetitive irritation model.
METHODS: Thirty-five healthy volunteers were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized study, and six barrier creams were evaluated against irritation induced by two occupationally relevant model solvents, n-octane and cumene. Clinical scoring and bioengineering methods (capacitance and transepidermal water loss measurements) were used to quantify the irritant reactions.
RESULTS: None of the test products offered protection against n-octane-induced clinical irritation or stratum corneum dehydration. One test product significantly aggravated the skin irritation induced by both irritants, and a second one enhanced dehydration induced by n-octane only.
CONCLUSIONS: The lack of efficacy and the aggravation of skin irritation induced by two of six test products stress the need for standardized efficacy testing of occupational skin protection products.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of barrier creams claimed to protect against lipophilic irritants in a newly developed repetitive irritation model.
METHODS: Thirty-five healthy volunteers were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized study, and six barrier creams were evaluated against irritation induced by two occupationally relevant model solvents, n-octane and cumene. Clinical scoring and bioengineering methods (capacitance and transepidermal water loss measurements) were used to quantify the irritant reactions.
RESULTS: None of the test products offered protection against n-octane-induced clinical irritation or stratum corneum dehydration. One test product significantly aggravated the skin irritation induced by both irritants, and a second one enhanced dehydration induced by n-octane only.
CONCLUSIONS: The lack of efficacy and the aggravation of skin irritation induced by two of six test products stress the need for standardized efficacy testing of occupational skin protection products.