Advertisement

Surface Skin Temperature in Tests for Irritant Dermatitis

  • Miranda A. Farage
  • Baiyang Wang
  • Kenneth W. Miller
  • Howard Maibach
Chapter

Abstract

Advances in measuring devices have made it feasible to conveniently measure localized changes in skin temperature. A series of experiments were conducted to determine if the addition of surface skin temperature measurements into studies commonly used to screen for skin responses to consumer products would increase the ability to discriminate between similar, mild products. Three testing protocols were evaluated: the modified arm patch with 24-h occlusive exposure for 4 consecutive applications, the behind the knee (BTK) with 6-h occlusive exposures with pressure for 5 consecutive days, and the bikini area shaving study with assessments after manual shaving by women with self-reported irritation after using a manual razor. In the modified arm patch studies, the positive irritant control (0.1 % sodium lauryl sulfate) produced mean erythematous scores that were higher (p < 0.05) than reactions produced by the negative irritant control (0.9 % saline), or the mild products. The skin surface temperatures were not significantly different in any arm patch study. In the BTK the two mild products produced significantly different levels of erythema at both the afternoon scoring (30–60 min after sample removal) and the morning scoring (after approximately 18 h of recovery). Skin surface temperatures differed only at the morning scoring. In the bikini area shaving study, mean erythema after 48 h was lower (p < 0.05) than after 5 min or 24 h on the left side only, indicating some degree of handedness. Skin surface temperature was significantly higher prior to the shaving exercise than at any of the subsequent scoring time points. Results indicate that the addition of measurements of skin surface temperature using DermaTemp® to standard exposure protocols used to evaluate potential skin responses to consumer products would not increase the ability to discriminate between products.

Keywords

Skin Temperature Sodium Lauryl Sulfate Skin Surface Temperature Bathroom Tissue Exposure Protocol 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Ms. H. Tucker, Ms. J. Erb, Ms. M. Jones, Ms. C. Wilson, and Dr. J. Morel for their technical help and assistance and to Terresa L. Nusair, Ph.D., of the Health and Environmental Safety Alliance (Cincinnati, Ohio) for technical input.

References

  1. 1.
    Farage MA (2008) Need for more sensitive tools as we reach the limits of our ability to detect differences in skin effects from mild products. In: Zhai H, Wilhelm K-P, Maibach HI (eds) Marzulli and Maibach’s dermatotoxicology, 7th edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 759–764Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farage MA, Maibach HI, Andersen KE, Lachapelle JM, Kern P, Ryan C, Ely J, Kanti A (2011) Historical perspective on the use of visual grading scales in evaluating skin irritation and sensitization. Contact Dermatitis 65(2):65–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (2000) JAMA 284(23):3043–3045Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farage MA (2008) Perceptions of sensitive skin: changes in perceived severity and associations with environmental causes. Contact Dermatitis 59(4):226–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Odio MR, O’Connor RJ, Sarbaugh S, Baldwin S (2000) Continuous topical administration of a petrolatum formulation by a novel disposable diaper. 2. Effect on skin condition. Dermatology 200(3):238–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baldwin S, Odio MR, Haines SL, O’Connor RJ, Englehart JS, Lane AT (2001) Skin benefits from continuous topical administration of a zinc oxide/petrolatum formulation by a novel disposable diaper. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 15(Suppl 1):5–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Farage MA, Ebrahimpour A, Steimle B, Englehart J, Smith D (2007) Evaluation of lotion formulations on irritation using the modified forearm-controlled application test method. Skin Res Technol 13(3):268–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farage MA, Berardesca E, Maibach H (2009) Skin moisturization and frictional effects of an emollient-treated menstrual pad with a foam core. Cutan Ocul Toxicol 28(1):25–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farage MA, Gilpin D, Enane NA, Baldwin S (2001) Development of a new test for mechanical irritation: behind the knee as a test site. Skin Res Technol 7(3):193–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ASTM Standard F2808, 2010 (2003) Standard test method for performing behind-the-knee (BTK) test for evaluating skin irritation response to products and materials that come into repeated or extended contact with skin. ASTM International, West Conshohocken. Available from: www.astm.org. Accessed 08 July 2011
  11. 11.
    Farage MA, Meyer SJ, Walter D (2004) Evaluation of modifications of the traditional patch test in assessing the chemical irritation potential of feminine hygiene products. Skin Res Technol 10(2):73–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farage MA (2006) The Behind-the-Knee test: an efficient model for evaluating mechanical and chemical irritation. Skin Res Technol 12(2):73–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morel JG, Bokossa MC, Neerchal NK (2003) Small sample correction for the variance of GEE estimators. Biom J 4:395–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patrick E, Maibach HI, Burkhalter AE (1985) Mechanisms of chemically induced skin irritation: I. Studies of time course, dose response, and components of inflammation in the laboratory mouse. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 81(3 Pt 1):476–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacobi U, Kaiser M, Koscielny J, Schütz R, Meinke M, Sterry W, Lademann J (2006) Comparison of blood flow to the cutaneous temperature and redness after topical application of benzyl nicotinate. J Biomed Opt 11(1):014025PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miranda A. Farage
    • 1
  • Baiyang Wang
    • 1
  • Kenneth W. Miller
    • 1
  • Howard Maibach
    • 2
  1. 1.Feminine Innovation CenterThe Procter & Gamble Company, Winton Hill Business CenterCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.Dermatology DepartmentUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations