Is it possible to characterize objectively sensitive skin?

Skin Research and Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 30-37

  Diogo, Lucília ^a   Papoila, Ana Luísa ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

^b Center of Statistics Applications of Lisbon University CEAUL   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Bioengineering methods; Sensitive skin; Skin susceptibility; Sodium lauryl sulphate

Indexed keywords

DERMATOLOGY; SULFUR COMPOUNDS;

BIOENGINEERING METHODS; COSMETIC PRODUCTS; HOUSEHOLD CLEANING PRODUCTS; SENSITIVE SKIN; SKIN SENSITIVITY; SODIUM LAURYL SULPHATE; STATISTICAL DIFFERENCES; TRANSEPIDERMAL WATER LOSS;

SODIUM COMPOUNDS;

DODECYL SULFATE SODIUM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ERYTHEMA; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYDRATION; NORMAL HUMAN; PERFUSION; PROVOCATION TEST; SKIN EXAMINATION; SKIN SENSITIVITY; SKIN WATER LOSS; WATER CONTENT;

EID: 73549107886     PISSN: 0909752X     EISSN: 16000846     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2009.00404.x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Draelos ZD. Treating the patient with multiple cosmetic product allergies. A problem-oriented approach to sensitive skin. Postgrad Med 2000, 107:70-72-75-77.
2. Willis CM, Shaw S, De Lacharriere O, Baverel M, Reiche L, Jourdain R, Bastien P, Wilkinson JD. Sensitive skin: an epidemiological study. Br J Dermatol 2001, 145:258-263.
3. Kligman AM, Sadiq I, Zhen Y, Crosby M. Experimental studies on the nature of sensitive skin. Skin Res Technol 2006, 12:217-222.
4. Morizot F, Guinot C, Lopez J, LaFus I, Tschachler E. Sensitive skin: analysis of symptoms, perceived causes and possible mechanisms. Cosmet Toiletries 2000, 115:83-89.
5. Simion FA, Rau AH. Sensitive skin: what is it and how to formulate for it. Cosmet Toiletries 1994, 109:43-50.
6. Paye M, Dalimer Ch, Cartiaux Y, Chabassol C. Consumer perception of sensitive hands: what is behind it? Skin Res Technol 1999, 5:28-32.
7. Mills OH, Berger RS. Defining the susceptibility of acne-prone and sensitive skin populations to extrinsic factors. Dermatol Clin 1991, 9:93-98.
8. Muizzuddin N, Marenus KD, Maes DH. Factors defining sensitive skin and its treatment. Am J Contact Dermat 1998, 9:170-175.
9. Draelos ZD. Formulating for sensitive skin. Cosmet Toiletries 2000, 115:47-56.
10. Pons-Guiraud A. Sensitive skin: a complex and multifactorial syndrome. J Cosmet Dermatol 2004, 3:145-148.
11. Loffler H, Dickel H, Kuss O, Diepgen TL, Effendy I. Characteristics of self-estimated enhanced skin susceptibility. Acta Der Venereol 2001, 81:343-346.
12. Kligman AM. Human models for characterizing 'Sensitive Skin'. Cosmet Dermatol 2001, 14:15-19.
13. Primavera G, Berardesca E. Sensitive skin: mechanisms and diagnosis. Int J Cosmet Sci 2005, 27:1-10.
14. Jourdain R, De Lacharrière O, Bastein P, Maibach HI. Ethnic variations in self-perceived sensitive skin: epidemiological survey. Contact Dermatitis 2002, 46:162-169.
15. Misery L, Myon E, Martin N, Verrière F, Nocera T, Taieb C. Sensitive skin in France: an epidemiological approach. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2005, 132:425-429.
16. Farage MA, Katsarou A, Maibach HI. Sensory, clinical and physiological factors in sensitive skin: a review. Contact Dermatitis 2006, 55:1-14.
17. Diogo L, Papoila AL, Rodrigues LM. About sensitive skin in Portugal. Rev. Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias da Saúde 2008, 5:116-126.
18. Roussaki-Schulze AV, Zafiriou E, Nikoulis D, Klimi E, Rallis E, Zintzaras E. Objective biophysical findings in pacients with sensitive skin. Drugs Exp Clin Res 2005, 31:17-24.
19. Distante F, Rigano L, D'Agostino R, Bonfigli A, Berardesca E. Intra- and Inter-individual differences in Sensitive skin. Cosmet Toiletries 2002, 117:39-46.
20. Seidenari S, Francomano M, Mantovani L. Baseline biophysical parameters in subjects with sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis 1998, 38:311-315.
21. Van de Vijver LPL, Boelsma E, Bausch-Goldbohm RA, Roza L. Subjective skin condition and its association with objective skin measurements. Cosmet Toiletries 2003, 118:45-54.
22. Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E, Lee CH, Fartasch M, Agner T, Serup J. Guidelines on sodium lauryl Sulphate (SLS) exposure tests A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1997, 37:53-69.
23. Fullerton A, Fischer T, Lahti A, Wilhelm KP, Takiwaki H, Serup J. Guidelines for measurement of skin colour and erythema A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1996, 35:1-10.
24. Pierard GE. EEMCO guidance for the assessment of skin colour. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 1998, 10:1-11.
25. 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, 22:164-178.
26. Berardesca E. EEMCO guidance for the assessment of stratum corneum hydratation: electrical methods. Skin Res Technol 1997, 3:126-132.
27. Berardesca E, Lévêque JL, Masson P. European Group for Efficacy Measurements on Cosmetics and Other Topical Products (EEMCO Group). EEMCO guidance for the measurement of skin microcirculation. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2002, 15:442-456.
28. Bircher A, de Boer EM, Agner T, Wahlberg JE, Serup J. Guidelines for measurement of cutaneous blood flow by laser Doppler flowmetry A report from Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1994, 30:65-72.
29. Friebe K, Effendy I, Löffler H. Effects of skin occlusion in patch testing with sodium lauryl sulphate. Br J Dermatol 2003, 148:65-69.
30. Zhai H, Maibach HI. Occlusion vs. skin barrier function. Skin Res Technol 2002, 8:1-6.
31. Zuang V, Rona C, Archer G, Berardesca E. Detection of skin irritation potential of cosmetics by non-invasive measurements. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2000, 13:358-371.
32. Tupker RA, Elsner P, Berardesca E, Maibach H. Prediction of irritancy. Bioengeneering of the skin: water and stratum corneum 1994, 73-81. In, eds, London, CRC Press
33. Schafer P, Bewick-Sonntag C, Capri MG, Berardesca E. Physiological changes in skin barrier function in relation to occlusion level, exposure time and climatic conditions. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2002, 15:7-19.
34. Sparavigna A, Di Pietro A, Setaro M. 'Healthy skin': significance and results of an Italian study on healthy populations with particular regard to 'sensitive skin'. Int J Cosmet Sci 2005, 27:327-331.
35. Gloor M, Senger B, Langenauer M, Fluhr JW. On the course of the irritant reaction after irritation with sodium lauryl sulphate. Skin Res Technol 2004, 10:144-148.
36. Geier J, Uter W, Pirker C, Frosch PJ. Patch testing with the irritant sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) is useful in interpreting weak reactions to contact allergens as allergic or irritant. Contact Dermatitis 2003, 48:99-107.
37. Judge MR, Griffiths HA, Basketter DA, White IR, Rycroft RJ, McFadden JP. Variation in response of human skin to irritant challenge. Contact Dermatitis 1996, 34:115-117.
38. Robinson MK. Population differences in skin structure and physiology and the susceptibility to irritant and allergic contact dermatitis: implications for skin safety testing and risk assessment. Contact Dermatitis 1999, 41:65-79.