Double blind randomized repetitive efficacy test of various occupational skin protection preparations against sodium lauryl sulphate

2Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Skin protection products, formerly named as barrier creams, are being used as primary and secondary prevention measures against occupational dermatoses. Many of these cosmetic products are claimed by manufacturers to be efficacious against wet work-induced skin barrier impairment if applied prior to exposure. However, results of validated and standardized in vivo efficacy tests allowing the comparison of different products are lacking. Material and methods: Efficacy of six skin protection products against sodium lauryl sulphate-induced irritant contact dermatitis was investigated in a double blind, randomized and controlled repetitive irritation study in healthy volunteers using skin physiological methods. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) results were used to calculate an efficacy index of protection by mathematical/statistical means according to a protocol developed in a German Statutory Accident Insurance (DGUV) multicenter study (research project FP 275). Results: All tested products had a demonstrable, protective effect against SLS compared to controls, but their relative efficacy varied significantly. Differences were also seen upon evaluation of other parameters such as corneometry and clinical irritation score (visual score). Conclusions: Product ranking as a result of the established differences allows improved selection of appropriate skin protection products based on objective parameters, as compared to heterogenous product claims.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schliemann, S., Müller, M., Stadeler, M., & Elsner, P. (2021). Double blind randomized repetitive efficacy test of various occupational skin protection preparations against sodium lauryl sulphate. JDDG - Journal of the German Society of Dermatology, 19(4), 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddg.14359

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free