The identification of biophysical parameters which reflect skin status following mechanical and chemical insults

Adhesives for medical application - Peel strength testing and evaluation of biophysical skin response

BACKGROUND

Medical adhesives are commonly used for securing wound dressings and medical devices used for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes. Mechanical irritation of skin due to adhesive stripping and repeated application can lead to discomfort and device removal. This study aims to examine the peel strength and skin response to different medical adhesives in a cohort of healthy volunteers.

METHOD

Twelve healthy participants were recruited for peel strength testing of three candidate adhesive tapes, and evaluation of the skin response after adhesive removal. A modified ASTM D903 peel strength testing was performed at 180° peeling angle and a rate of 300 mm/min on the forehead, upper back and forearm skin. A longitudinal study was conducted on the forearm and back, with the adhesive samples left in-situ for up to 60 h for analysis of repeat application. The effects of two skin preparation approaches (water and alcohol cleaning) prior to adhesive application were also assessed. Skin biophysical properties were assessed at baseline and at various timepoints following adhesive removal using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), erythema and hydration.

RESULTS

Peel strength reduced uniformly with repeat application over prolonged periods for all the adhesive samples tested. Skin preparation with water and alcohol cleansing prior to adhesive application increased peel strength at both the back (1.1% and 2.9%), and forearm (21.3% and 20%) sites. There was statistically significant increase from baseline to post-tape application for TEWL, skin redness and hydration (p < 0.001). However, there were no statistically significant differences between adhesive types (TEWL: p = 0.38, SR: p = 0.53, HY: p = 0.46). TEWL increased the most post-adhesion across all test sites and adhesive samples with repeat application (p < 0.05). Two-way ANOVA tests revealed no statistically significant interactions between the effects of application duration and adhesive on skin redness or TEWL for both the back and forearm sites (p > 0.05), though a significant interaction was indicted for hydration at the back site (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that site and duration of adhesive application effected peel strength. The corresponding changes in skin properties identified that skin barrier function was disrupted with long-term application of adhesives. The back site was identified to be most reliable for adhesion testing and skin response assessment for future work.

The Effects of Incontinence Pad Application on Loaded Skin With Reference to Biophysical and Biochemical Parameters: An Exploratory Cohort Study Using a Repeated-Measures Design

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate temporal changes in skin responses following exposure to moisture alone or moisture in combination with mechanical loading.

DESIGN

Comparison cohort with a repeated-measures design.

SUBJECTS AND SETTINGS

The sample comprised 12 healthy volunteers. Participants were purposely sampled from 2 different age groups; half were 32 to 39 years old and half were 50 to 62 years old. Participants identified as White, Black, or mixed; 83% (n = 10) identified as White; 8 (67%) were female.

METHODS

Four sites at the sacrum were challenged with the application of specimens taken from 2 absorbent products; the pad specimens were applied dry or saturated with synthetic urine (SU; pH = 8); a further site from the sacral skin was also selected and used as a control. Skin assessments were performed at different points in time: (1) 60 minutes after exposure to dry or SU-saturated pad specimens; (2) 60 minutes after exposure to pads and mechanical loading (application of pressure in the form of 45°C high sitting); and (3) 30 minutes after removal of all pads (recovery period). Outcome measures were transepidermal water loss (TEWL), stratum corneum (SC) hydration, erythema, pH, and skin inflammatory biomarkers measured at each of the time points described earlier.

RESULTS

The control site and those exposed to dry pads showed minimal time-dependent changes irrespective of the parameter investigated. In contrast, significant increases in TEWL (P = .0000007) and SC hydration responses (P = .0000007) were detected at the sites under absorbent pad specimens after saturation with SU (exposure to moisture). In some participants, TEWL and SC hydration parameters were significantly higher during pressure application. Skin pH remained in the mildly acidic range throughout the test session, and no consistent trends were observed with erythema. Skin inflammatory biomarkers also exhibited considerable variability across participants; none changed significantly over time. Significant differences (P = .02) were also detected following the exposure of moisture in combination with pressure.

CONCLUSION

We evaluated an array of parameters to identify changes following skin exposure to 2 absorbent pads in the presence and absence of SU and mechanical loading. Analysis revealed changes in skin barrier properties in the presence of moisture and/or pressure. This observation suggests a need for frequent pad changing as well as periods of skin off-loading to protect the skin health of individuals with incontinence.

Spatial and temporal changes in biophysical skin parameters over a category I pressure ulcer

In acute care facilities, the detection of pressure ulcers (PUs) relies on visual and manual examination of the patient's skin, which has been reported to be inconsistent and may lead to misdiagnosis. In skin and wound research, various biophysical parameters have been extensively employed to monitor changes in skin health. Nonetheless, the transition of these measures into care settings as part of a routine clinical assessment has been limited. This study was designed to examine the spatial and temporal changes in skin biophysical parameters over the site of a category I PU, in a cohort of hospitalised patients. Thirty patients, each presenting with a category I PU, were enrolled in the study. Skin integrity was assessed at the PU-compromised site and two adjacent areas (5 and 10 cm away). Data was collected over three sessions to examine both temporal differences and longitudinal changes. Skin integrity was assessed using two biophysical parameters, namely, transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and stratum corneum (SC) hydration. In addition, the influence of intrinsic factors, namely, incontinence and mobility status, on the parameters was evaluated. TEWL values at the sites compromised by PU were statistically significantly greater (P < .001) than corresponding values at the adjacent control sites at 5 and 10 cm, which were consistent with a normative range (<20 g/h/m2 ). By contrast, SC hydration values did not reveal clear distinctions between the three sites, with high inter-patient variation detected at the sites. Nevertheless, individual profiles were consistent across the three sessions, and the PU site was observed to be either abnormally dry or overhydrated in different individuals. No consistent temporal trend in either parameter was evident. However, intrinsic factors were shown to influence the parameters, with females, bedridden and incontinent patients presenting significantly higher TEWL and SC hydration values (P < .05). TEWL was able to identify differences in skin responses at skin sites compromised with a category I PU when compared to healthy adjacent skin sites. Accordingly, this parameter could be included in the clinical assessment for the identification of PU risk. Further studies are required to elucidate the role of hydration and skin barrier function in the development of PUs and their ability to monitor temporal changes in skin integrity.

The theory and practice of pressure ulcer/injury risk assessment: a critical discussion

Pressure ulcer/injury (PU) risk assessment is widely considered an essential component in clinical practice. It is a complex and broad concept that includes different approaches, such as clinical judgement, using standardised risk assessment instruments, skin assessments, or using devices to measure skin or tissue properties. A distinction between PU risk assessment and early detection is important. PU risk measures the individual's susceptibility to developing a PU under a specific exposure (primary prevention), and early detection includes the assessment of early (sub)clinical signs and symptoms to prevent progression and to support healing (secondary prevention). PU risk is measured using prognostic/risk factors or prognostic models. Every risk estimate is a probability statement containing varying degrees of uncertainty. It therefore follows that every clinical decision based on risk estimates also contains uncertainty. PU risk assessment and prevention is a complex intervention, where delivery contains several interacting components. There is a huge body of evidence indicating that risk assessment and its outcomes, the selection of preventive interventions and PU incidence are not well connected. Methods for prognostic model development and testing in PU risk research must be improved and follow state-of-the-art methodological standards. Despite these challenges, we do have substantial knowledge about PU risk factors that helps us to make better clinical decisions. An important next step in the development of PU risk prediction might be the combination of clinical and other predictors for more individualised care. Any prognostic test or procedure must lead to better prevention at an acceptable cost.

Inflammatory biomarkers in sebum for identifying skin damage in patients with a Stage I pressure ulcer in the pelvic region: A single centre observational, longitudinal cohort study with elderly patients

Pressure Ulcers (PU) are a major burden for affected patients and healthcare providers. Current detection methods involve visual assessments of the skin by healthcare professionals. This has been shown to be subjective and unreliable, with challenges associated with identifying erythema in darker colour skin. Although there exists a number of promising non-invasive biophysical techniques such as ultrasound, capacitance measurements, and thermography, the present study focuses on directly measuring the changes in the inflammatory status of the skin and underlying tissues. Therefore, in this study, we aim to analyse inflammatory cytokines collected through non-invasive sampling techniques to detect early signs of skin damage. Thirty hospitalised patients presenting with Stage I PU were recruited to evaluate the inflammatory response of skin at the site of damage and an adjacent healthy control site. Sebutapes were collected over three sessions to investigate the temporal changes in the inflammatory response. The panel of cytokines investigated included high-abundance cytokines, namely, IL-1α and IL-1RA, and low abundance cytokines; IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α, INF-γ, IL-33, IL-1β and G-CSF. Spatial and temporal differences between sites were assessed and thresholds were used to determine the sensitivity and specificity of each biomarker. The results suggest significant (P < .05) spatial changes in the inflammatory response, with upregulation of IL-1α, IL-8, and G-CSF as well as down-regulation of IL-1RA over the Stage I PU compared with the adjacent control site. There were no significant temporal differences between the three sessions. Selected cytokines, namely, IL-1α, IL-1RA, IL-8, G-CSF, and the ratio IL-1α/IL-1RA offered clear delineation in the classification of healthy and Stage-I PU skin sites, with receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrating high sensitivity and specificity. There were limited influences of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the biomarker response. Inflammatory markers provided a high level of discrimination between the sites presenting with Stage I PU and an adjacent healthy skin site, in a cohort of elderly inpatients. Indeed, the ratio of IL-1α to IL-1RA provided the highest sensitivity and specificity, indicative that inflammatory homeostasis is affected at the PU site. There was a marginal influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, demonstrating the localised effects of the inflammation. Further studies are required to investigate the potential of inflammatory cytokines incorporated within Point of Care technologies, to support routine clinical use.

The Science of Skin: Measuring Damage and Assessing Risk

Significance: Healthy skin provides a barrier to contaminants. Breaches in skin integrity are often encountered in the patient health care journey, owing to intrinsic health issues or to various procedures and medical devices used. The time has come to move clinical practice beyond mere awareness of medical adhesive-related skin injury and toward improved care and outcomes. Recent Advances: Methods developed in research settings allow quantitative assessments of skin damage based on the measurement of baseline skin properties. These properties become altered by stress and over time. Assessment methods typically used by the cosmetic industry to compare product performance could offer new possibilities to improve clinical practice by providing better information on the status of patient skin. This review summarizes available skin assessment methods as well as specific patient risks for skin damage. Critical Issues: Patients in health care settings may be at risk for skin damage owing to predisposing medical conditions, health status, medications taken, and procedures or devices used in their treatment. Skin injuries come as an additional burden to these medical circumstances and could be prevented. Technology should be leveraged to improve care, help maintain patient skin health, and better characterize functional wound closure. Future Directions: Skin testing methods developed to evaluate cosmetic products or assess damage caused by occupational exposure can provide detailed, quantitative information on the integrity of skin. Such methods have the potential to guide prevention and treatment efforts to improve the care of patients suffering from skin integrity issues while in the health care system.

The effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on skin biophysical properties in patients with breast cancer at risk for breast lymphedema: A prospective study

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common type of cancer among women. Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the main and primary treatment options for BC, especially in breast-conserving surgery (BCS). BC patients who underwent RT experience a wide range of symptoms, in which breast oedema and irritation of the skin take the lion's share. Breast oedema/lymphedema, which is also a prominent side effect after RT should be well determined in earlier settings due to the chronicity of lymphedema. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the biophysical parameters of skin on the ipsilateral (IL) and contralateral (CL) sites via Tissue dielectric constant (TDC) and Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) methods in terms of oedema and skin barrier function (SBF). The following reference points before and after the RT were measured: (R1: Pectoralis muscle, R2: Upper breast, R3: Lower breast, R4: Lateral site of the thorax). A total of 24 BC patients (mean age and BMI: 52.78 ± 9.85 years and 28.42 ± 5.64 kg/m² ) were evaluated. In the IL site, the SBF was not found significant in R1-R3, whereas significantly lower SBF was observed in R4 after RT (t = -3.361, p = 0.003). A significant increase in TDC was observed in R2 at the 5.0 mm depth (t = -2.500, p = 0.02). We suggest that a longer period of follow-up should be carefully carried out to track changes in terms of SBF and oedema in the irradiated breast. The increased need for early detection of changes associated with breast lymphedema can be achievable via noninvasive, safe, cheap, and easily repeatable devices.

Biophysical and biochemical changes in skin health of healthcare professionals using respirators during COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Personal protective equipment, including respirator devices, has been used to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. These are fitted to skin sites on the face to prevent airborne transmission but have resulted in reports of discomfort and adverse skin reactions from their continued usage. The present study addresses the objective changes in both the structural integrity and biological response of the skin following prolonged and consecutive use of respirators.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A longitudinal cohort study, involving 17 HCWs who wear respirators daily, was designed. Changes in the barrier properties and biological response of the skin were assessed at three facial anatomical sites, namely, the nasal bridge, left cheek and at a location outside the perimeter of respirator. Assessments were made on three different sessions corresponding to the first, second and third consecutive days of mask usage. Skin parameters included transepidermal water loss (TEWL), stratum corneum (SC) hydration and erythema, as well as cytokine biomarkers sampled from sebum using a commercial tape.

RESULTS

The cheek and the site outside the perimeter covered by the respirator presented minimal changes in skin parameters. By contrast, significant increases in both the TEWL (up to 4.8 fold) and SC hydration (up to 2.7 fold) were detected at the nasal bridge on the second consecutive day of respirator-wearing. There was a high degree of variation in the individual expression of pro-and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Increasing trends in nasal bridge TEWL values were associated with the body mass index (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The most sensitive objective parameter in detecting changes in the skin barrier proved to be the increase in TEWL at the nasal bridge, particularly on the second day of consecutive respirator usage. By contrast, other measures of skin were less able to detect remarkable variations in the barrier integrity. Consideration for protecting skin health is required for frontline workers, who continue to wear respirators for prolonged periods over consecutive days during the pandemic.