Open AccessEffect of a water‐based no‐sting, protective barrier formulation and a solvent‐containing similar formulation on skin protection from medical adhesive trauma
Author(s) -
Shan Ronald J,
Chakravarthy Debashish
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
international wound journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.867
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1742-481X
pISSN - 1742-4801
DOI - 10.1111/j.1742-481x.2008.00559.x
Subject(s) - medicine , erythema , transepidermal water loss , sting , dermatology , skin care , adhesive , nursing , stratum corneum , pathology , engineering , aerospace engineering , chemistry , organic chemistry , layer (electronics)
Trauma to the skin from repeated removal of adhesive‐based medical products can cause pain, anxiety, risk of secondary infections and additional health care costs. Skin barrier formulations are used to protect the integrity from such trauma. However, not all formulations are equally protective. We report the results of a randomised controlled study comparing a solvent‐free (SF) formulation and a solvent‐containing (SC) formulation to the skin of 12 healthy volunteers aged 18–55 years. Treatments were applied at baseline to two of the four test sites on the back of each subject and repeated for 5 days. Measurements of pain, discomfort, erythema and skin water loss were taken 24 hours after each application. The SF formulation is associated with lower mean scores for erythema (day 5, P < 0·05) and lower values for transepidermal water loss (day 5, P < 0·05) and redness (days 4 and 5, P < 0·05) when compared with either no treatment or daily treatment with a SC formulation. There were no significant differences between subject responses when pain on application of the test formulation or discomfort associated with removal of the medical adhesive tapes were rated. We conclude that a SF formulation provides better security against adhesive‐derived skin trauma than a SC formulation.