Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
medicine
International guidelines for the in vivo assessment of skin properties in non-clinical settings: Part 2. transepidermal water loss and skin hydration
Skin Research and Technology, Volume 19, No. 3, Year 2013
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
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. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Authors & Co-Authors
Du Plessis, Johan Lodewykus
South Africa, Potchefstroom
North-west University
Stefaniak, Aleksandr Byron
United States, Washington, D.c.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Eloff, Fritz
South Africa, Potchefstroom
North-west University
John, Swen
Germany, Osnabruck
Osnabrück University
Agner, Tove
Denmark, Copenhagen
Københavns Universitet
Chou, Tzu Chieh
Taiwan, Taichung
China Medical University
Nixon, Rosemary
Australia, Melbourne
Victoria's Skin and Cancer Foundation
Steiner, Markus F.C.
United Kingdom, Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
Franken, Anja
South Africa, Potchefstroom
North-west University
Kudla, Irena
Canada, Toronto
Saint Michael's Hospital University of Toronto
Holness, Linn
Canada, Toronto
Saint Michael's Hospital University of Toronto
Statistics
Citations: 197
Authors: 11
Affiliations: 8
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1111/srt.12037
ISSN:
0909752X
e-ISSN:
16000846
Research Areas
Environmental