Side-by-side comparison of an open-chamber (TM 300) and a closed-chamber (Vapometer™) transepidermal water loss meter

Skin Research and Technology

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 366-372

  Steiner, Markus ^a   Aikman Green, Sylvie ^a   Prescott, Gordon J ^a   Dick, Finlay D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Closed chamber TEWL; In vivo; Open chamber TEWL; Side by side comparison; Trans epidermal water loss (TEWL)

Indexed keywords

CLOSED CHAMBERS; IN VIVO; OPEN-CHAMBER TEWL; SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON; TRANS EPIDERMAL WATER LOSS (TEWL);

DERMATOLOGY;

MEASUREMENTS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; DEVICE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRODUCT PARAMETERS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SKIN CARE; SKIN FUNCTION; SKIN WATER LOSS; TRANSEPIDERMAL WATER LOSS METER;

CLOSED-CHAMBER TEWL; IN VIVO; OPEN-CHAMBER TEWL; SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON; TRANS EPIDERMAL WATER LOSS (TEWL);

ADULT; BODY WATER; DERMATOLOGY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WATER; WATER LOSS, INSENSIBLE;

EID: 79960315105     PISSN: 0909752X     EISSN: 16000846     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0846.2011.00509.x     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Piérard GE, Vroome V, Borgers M et al. New insights in the effects of topical ketoconazole. Curr Topic Pharmacol 2006; 10: 59-65.
2. Aalto-Korte K, Turpeinen M. Transepidermal water loss predicts systemic absorption of topical hydrocortisone in atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 1996; 135: 497-498.
3. Choi SJ, Song MG, Sung WT et al. Comparison of transepidermal water loss, capacitance and pH values in the skin between intrinsic and extrinsic atopic dermatitis patients. J Korean Med Sci 2003; 18: 93-96.
4. Fluhr JW, Feingold KR, Elias PM. Transepidermal water loss reflects permeability barrier status: validation in human and rodent in vivo and ex vivo models. Exp Dermatol 2006; 15: 483-492.
5. Gupta J, Grube E, Lucky A et al. Transepidermal water loss as a biological marker in atopic dermatitis in children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007; 119 (Suppl. 1): S280.
6. Savica S, Tamburic S, Savic M et al. Vehicle-controlled effect of urea on normal and SLS-irritated skin. Int J Pharm 2004; 271: 269-280.
7. Schurer NY, Klippel U, Schwanitz HJ. Secondary individual prevention of hand dermatitis in geriatric nurses. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2005; 78: 149-157.
8. Winker R, Salameh B, Stolkovich S et al. Effectiveness of skin protection creams in the prevention of occupational dermatitis: results of a randomized, controlled trial. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2009; 82: 653-662.
9. Nuutinen J, Alanen E, Autio P et al. A closed unventilated chamber for the measurement of transepidermal water loss. Skin Res Technol 2003; 9: 85-89.
10. CK Electronic GmbH. Information and operating instructions for the multi probe adapter MPA and its probes. MPA general English 10/2007, DK & MPA TM English 12/2003. Cologne, Germany: CK Electronic GmbH, 2007.
11. Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner T et al. 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.
12. Rogiers V, EEMCO Group. EEMCO guidance for the assessment of transepidermal water loss in cosmetic sciences. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 2001; 14: 117-128.
13. StataCorp. Stata statistical software: resease 11. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP, 2009.
14. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-310.
15. Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. J Biopharm Stat 2007; 17: 571-582.
16. De Paepe K, Houben E, Adam R et al. Validation of the VapoMeter, a closed unventilated chamber system to assess transepidermal water loss vs the open chamber Tewameter. Skin Res Technol 2005; 11: 61-69.
17. Shah JH, Zhai H, Maibach HI. Comparative evaporimetry in man. Skin Res Technol 2005; 11: 205-208.
18. Zhai H, Dika E, Goldovsky M et al. Tape-stripping method in man: comparison of evaporimetric methods. Skin Res Technol 2007; 13: 207-210.
19. Farahmand S, Tien L, Hui X et al. Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems. Skin Res Technol 2009; 15: 392-398.
20. Nuutinen J, Lahtinen T. TEWL underestimation of open-chamber evaporimeters at high skin water loss. US Symposium of the International Society for Biophysics and Skin Imaging (ISBS), 12th-14th Oct 2006, Stone Mountain/Atlanta, USA.
21. Elkeeb R, Hui XY, Chan HD et al. Correlation of transepidermal water loss with skin barrier properties in vitro: comparison of three evaporimeters. Skin Res Technol 2010; 16: 9-15.