Dykes P, Bradbury S
Director, Cutest Systems Ltd, Cardiff.
Clinical Nurse Manager, Medicareplus International Ltd, London.
J Wound Care. 2017 Sep 2;26(9):552-557. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.9.552.
Preventing moisture damage and breakdown of the skin can be a particular challenge for patients with incontinence. The level of protection offered by various skin protectant products can vary according to the chemical nature of the formulation and can decrease following wash procedures. The aim of this study was to compare five silicone-containing skin barrier creams indicated for use on incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) in terms of their resistance to a standardised wash cycle in healthy volunteer subjects.
A skin surface hygrometer (Skicon 200EX) evaluated skin surface conduction non-invasively on 36 non-patient subjects using a high-frequency (3.5MHz) electric current. This provided an index of the degree of protection given by barrier products after a single application and also any reduction in barrier properties after a repeated wash procedure.
Medi Derma-S barrier cream (MDS), Cavilon barrier cream (CBC) and LBF barrier cream (LBF) all demonstrated statistically significant differences (p<0.001) in the Skicon values following the first moisture challenge compared with Medihoney (MH), Remedy barrier cream (RBC) and the untreated control. All other comparisons were not significant (p>0.05). Statistical analysis following four moisture challenges reflected the results following the first, whereby Skicon values following treatment with MDS, CBC and LBF was significantly different compared with MH, RBC and the untreated control. Again, all other comparisons were not significant (p>0.05). When expressed as percentage barrier effectiveness, the results show a similar pattern to the absolute Skicon values.
The results of this study show that there were differences between the barrier creams in terms of the initial moisture challenge and the resistance to wash-off following a repeated standardised wash procedure. It was concluded that MDS, CBC and LBF barrier cream all showed significant and equally effective moisture barrier protection and wash-off resistance.
对于失禁患者而言，防止皮肤受潮损伤和破损可能是一项特殊挑战。各种皮肤保护产品提供的保护水平可能因配方的化学性质而异，并且在清洗后可能会降低。本研究的目的是比较五种用于失禁相关性皮炎（IAD）的含硅酮皮肤屏障乳膏在健康志愿者受试者中对标准化洗涤循环的耐受性。
使用皮肤表面湿度计（Skicon 200EX），通过高频（3.5MHz）电流对36名非患者受试者的皮肤表面传导进行无创评估。这提供了屏障产品单次应用后给予的保护程度指标，以及重复洗涤程序后屏障性能的任何降低情况。
与麦卢卡蜂蜜（MH）、修复屏障乳膏（RBC）和未处理的对照相比，Medi Derma-S屏障乳膏（MDS）、恺德防护乳膏（CBC）和LBF屏障乳膏（LBF）在首次水分挑战后的Skicon值均显示出统计学上的显著差异（p<0.001）。所有其他比较均无显著差异（p>0.05）。四次水分挑战后的统计分析反映了首次挑战后的结果，即与MH、RBC和未处理的对照相比，用MDS、CBC和LBF处理后的Skicon值有显著差异。同样，所有其他比较均无显著差异（p>0.05）。当以屏障有效性百分比表示时，结果显示出与绝对Skicon值相似的模式。
本研究结果表明，在初始水分挑战和重复标准化洗涤程序后的耐冲洗性方面，屏障乳膏之间存在差异。得出的结论是，MDS、CBC和LBF屏障乳膏均显示出显著且同等有效的防潮保护和耐冲洗性。
