Effect of a water-based no-sting, protective barrier formulation and a solvent-containing similar formulation on skin protection from medical adhesive trauma

International Wound Journal

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 82-88

  Shannon, Ronald J ^a   Chakravarthy, Debashish ^b  

^a Global Health Economic Projects LLC   (United States)

^b Medline Industries Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Skin barrier function; Solvent free formulation; Tape stripping; Transepidermal water loss

Indexed keywords

ADHESIVE AGENT; SKIN PROTECTIVE AGENT; SOLVENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DOSAGE FORM COMPARISON; DRUG FORMULATION; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMAN; IATROGENIC DISEASE; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SKIN DISCOMFORT; SKIN INJURY; SKIN PROTECTION; SKIN REDNESS; SKIN WATER LOSS; SURGICAL TAPE; TREATMENT RESPONSE; WOUND CARE; WOUND DRESSING;

ADMINISTRATION, CUTANEOUS; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOLVENTS; SURGICAL TAPE; TISSUE ADHESIVES; WATER LOSS, INSENSIBLE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 61849092113     PISSN: 17424801     EISSN: 1742481X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2008.00559.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Cutting KF. Impact of adhesive surgical tape and wound dressings on the skin, with reference to skin stripping. J Wound Care 2008 17 : 157 62.
2. Watret L, Rogers A. The use of adhesive dressings on the diabetic foot-wound care. The Diabetic Foot, Autumn 2003. Available at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi-MDQ/is-36/ai-108881847.
3. Collier M. Pain and tissue trauma during dressing change. Nurs Stand 2000 14 : 71 3.
4. Lund C, Nonato L, Kuller J, Franck L, Cullander C, Durand D. Disruption of barrier function in neonatal skin associated with adhesive removal. J Urol 1998 160 : 286 7.
5. Jester R, Russell L, Fell S, Williams S, Prest C. A one hospital study of the effect of wound dressings and other related factors on skin blistering following total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Nurs 2000 4 : 71 7.
6. Fleck CA. Preventing and treating skin tears. Adv Skin Wound Care 2007 20 : 315 21.
7. Flett A, Russell F, Stringfellow S, Cooper PJ, Gray DG. Modern wound management: review of common products. Nurs Residential Care 2002 4 : 328 42.
8. Gallagher S. Morbid obesity: a chronic disease with an impact on wounds and relted problems. Ostomy Wound Manage 1997 43 : 18 27.
9. Wilson DR, Maibach HI. TEWL and the newborn. In : Elsner P, Berardesca B, Maibach M, editors, Bioengineering of the skin: water and the stratum corneum. Ann Arbor : CRC Press, 1994 : 115 32.
10. Grubauer G, Elias PM, Feingold KR. Transepidermal water loss: the signal for recovery of barrier structure and function. J Lipid Res 1989 30 : 323.
11. Reed JT, Ghadially R, Elias PM. Skin type, but neither race nor gender, influence epidermal barrier function. Arch Dermatol 1995 131 : 1134.
12. Denda M, Tsuchiya T. Barrier recovery rate varies time-dependently in human skin. Br J Dermatol 2000 142 : 881.
13. Loden M, Barany E. Skin-identical lipids versus petrolatum in the treatment of tape-stripped and detergent perturbed human skin. Acta Dermatol Venereol 2000 80 : 412.
14. Ferguson JC, Martin CJ, Rayner C. Burn wound evaporation-measurement of body fluid loss by probe evaporimeter and weight change. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1991 12 : 143 5.
15. Wu P, Nelson EA, Reid WH, Ruckley CV, Gaylor JDS. Water vapour transmission rates in burns and chronic leg ulcers: influence of wound dressings and comparison with in vitro evaluation. Biomaterials 1996 17 : 1373 7.
16. Tanojo H, Boelsma E, Junginger HE, Ponec M, Bodde HE. In vivo human skin barrier modulation by topical application of fatty acids. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 1998 11 : 87 97.
17. Zhai H, Maibach HI. Occlusion vs. skin barrier function. Skin Res Technol 2002 8 : 1 6.
18. Tokumura F, Umekage K, Sado M, Otsuka S, Suda S, Tanguchi M, Yamori A, Nakamura A, Kawai J, Oka K. Skin irritation due to repetitive application of adhesive tape: the influence of adhesive strength and seasonal variability. Skin Res Technol 2005 11 : 102 6.
19. Dykes PJ. The effect of adhesive dressing edges on cutaneous irritancy and skin barrier function. J Wound Care 2007 16 : 97 100.
20. Dykes PJ, Heggie R. The link between the peel force of adhesive dressings and subjective discomfort in volunteer subjects. J Wound Care 2003 12 : 260 2.
21. Dykes PJ, Heggie R, Hill SA. Effects of adhesive dressings on the stratum corneum of the skin. J Wound Care 2001 10 : 7 10.
22. Gotschall C, Morrison M, Eichelberger M. Prospective randomized study on Mepitel on children with partial-thickness scalds. J Burn Care Rehabil 1998 19 : 279 83.
23. Puntillo KA, White C, Morris AB, Perdue ST, Stanik-Hutt J, Thompson CL, Wild LR. Patients' perceptions and responses to procedural pain: results from the Thunder Project II. Am J Crit Care 2000 10 : 238 51.
24. Szor JK, Bourguignon C. Description of pressure ulcer pain at rest and at dressing change. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 1999 26 : 115 20.
25. Butler CT. Pediatric skin care: guidelines for assessment, prevention, and treatment. Pediatr Nurs 2006 32 : 443 50.
26. Brett DW. Impact on pain control, epidermal stripping, leakage of wound fluid, ease of use, pressure reduction, and cost-effectiveness. 2006 33 (6 Suppl S15 9.
27. Black P. Peristomal skin care: an overview of available products. Br J Nurs 2007 16 : 1048, 1050, 1052 4 passim.
28. Babulak SW, Rhein LD, Scala DD, Simion AF, Grove GL. Quantification of erythema in a soap chamber test using the Minolta Chroma (Reflectance) meter: comparison of instrumental results with visual assessments. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1986 37 : 475 9.
29. Grove GL, Grove MJ, Zerweck C, Pierce E. Comparative metrology of the evaporimeter and the DermLab TEWL probe. Skin Res Tech 1999 5 : 1 9.
30. Grove GL, Grove MJ, Zerweck C, Pierce E. Computerized evaporimetry using the DermLab TEWL probe. Skin Res Tech 1999 5 : 9 13.
31. Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner T, Serup J. Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement: a report from the standardization group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1990 22 : 164 78.
32. Shuren J, Becker A, Sibbald RG. A liquid film-forming acrylate for peri-wound protection: a systematic review and meta-analysis (3M SC no sting barrier film). Int Wound J 2005 2 : 230 8.
33. Lutz LB. Performance assessment of film forming barrier (Skin Sealants). St Paul : 3M Health Care, 2002 Research Results.