Summary
The skin irritation evoked by urostomal adhesives with three different types of adhesive material was investigated. The 74 test subjects had previously not been using stomal appliances. A standard patch test was performed on normal skin of the back for 48 h, and readings were made 1 and 24 h later. The lowest irritation was observed after an adhesive disk composed of pectin, gelatine and sodium carboxymethylcellulose.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bergman B, Knutson F, Lincoln K, Löwenhagen G-B, Mobacken H (1979) Chronic papillomatous dermatitis as a peristomal complication in conduit urinary diversion. Scand J Urol Nephrol 13:201–204
Bradley JW (1968) Distribution-free statistical tests. Prentice Hall, London
Cramér H (1946) Mathematical methods of statistics. Princeton University Press, Princeton USA
Filmer RB, Honesty H (1974) Problems with urinary conduit stomas in children. Urol Clin North Am 1:531–547
Frosch P, Kligman A (1976) The chamber-scarification test for irritancy. Contact Dermatitis 2:314–324
Holst R, Möller H (1975) One hundred twin pairs patch tested with primary irritants. Br J Dermatol 93:145–149
Magnusson B, Hellgren L (1962) Skin irritating and adhesive characteristics of some different adhesive tapes. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 42:463–472
Marks R, Evans E, Clarke TK (1978) The effects on normal skin of adhesive from stoma appliances. Curr Med Res Opin 5: 720–725
McNamara RJ, Farber EM, Roland SI (1959) Problems and treatment of the circumileostomy skin. JAMA 171:1066–1072
Odén A, Wedel H (1975) Arguments for Fisher's permutation test. Ann Statistics 3:518–520
Odén A, Pehrsson N-G (1974) A linear permutation test corresponding to the Wilcoxon one sample test. Publication 1974:4, Dept. of Mathematics, Chalmers University of Technology & University of Göteborg, Sweden
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bergman, B., Löwhagen, G.B. & Mobacken, H. Irritant skin reactions to urostomal adhesives. Urol. Res. 10, 153–155 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00255960
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00255960