Abstract
TransEpidermal water loss (TEWL) is recognised as the main indicator of skin barrier function. Since the 1970s, the open-chamber method of measurement has established itself as the main method for TEWL measurement and a de facto standard against which newer technologies are judged. However, the open-chamber method is known to suffer from a number of limitations, the main one being disturbance by ambient air movements. This limitation can be overcome by closing the measurement chamber, but this design change affects other aspects of the measurement.
Closed-chamber instruments bring a new dimension to TEWL measurement, because their immunity to disturbance by external air movements makes it possible for such measurements to migrate away from the well-controlled laboratory environment into the workplace or clinic. This and other aspects of their design liberate them from many of the restrictions and precautions recommended in the now outdated TEWL guidelines.
This chapter describes two commercial closed-chamber instruments, the AquaFlux and the VapoMeter, whose characteristics are discussed within the context of the established open-chamber method. These instruments differ in measurement principle, concept and design. The AquaFlux, which uses the condenser-chamber method of measurement, is a benchtop, mains-powered instrument. The VapoMeter, which uses the unventilated-chamber method of measurement, is a self-contained, battery-powered instrument. Their performance characteristics are also quite different, with accuracy, sensitivity and repeatability the main features of the AquaFlux and speed and mobility the main features of the VapoMeter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nilsson GE (1977) Measurement of water exchange through skin. Med Biol Comput 15:209–218
Imhof RE, Berg EP, Chilcott RP, Ciortea LI, Pascut FC (2002) New instrument for measuring water vapour flux density from arbitrary surfaces. IFSCC Mag 5(4):297–301
Imhof RE, De Jesus MEP, Xiao P, Ciortea LI, Berg EP (2009) Closed-chamber transepidermal water loss measurement: microclimate, calibration and performance. Int J Cosmet Sci 31:97–118
Wallihan EF (1964) Modification and use of an electric hygrometer for estimating relative stomatal apertures. Plant Physiol 39:86–90
Miller DL, Brown AM, Artz EJ (1981) Indirect measures of transepidermal water loss. In: Marks R, Payne PA (eds) Bioengineering and the skin. MTP Press, Lancaster, pp 161–171
Tagami H, Kobayashi H, Kikuchi K (2002) A portable device using a closed chamber system for measuring transepidermal water loss: comparison with the conventional method. Skin Res Technol 8:7–12
Nuutinen J, Alanen E, Autio P, Lahtinen M, Harvima I, Lahtinen T (2003) A closed unventilated chamber for the measurement of transepidermal water loss. Skin Res Technol 9:85–89
De Paepe K, Houben E, Adam R, Wiesemann F, Rogiers V (2005) Validation of the VapoMeter, a closed unventilated chamber system to assess transepidermal water loss vs. the open chamber Tewameter. Skin Res Technol 11:61–69
Farahmand S, Tien L, Hui X, Maibach HI (2009) Measuring transepidermal water loss: a comparative in vivo study of condenser-chamber, unventilated-chamber and open-chamber systems. Skin Res Technol 15(4):392–398
Elkeeb R, Hui X, Chan H, Tian L, Maibach HI (2010) Correlation of transepidermal water loss with skin barrier properties in vitro: comparison of three evaporimeters. Skin Res Technol 16(1):9–15
Steiner M, Aikman-Green S, Prescott GJ, Dick FD (2011) Side-by-side comparison of an open-chamber (TM 300) and a closed-chamber (Vapometer (TM)) transepidermal water loss meter. Skin Res Technol 17:366–372
Shah JH, Zhai H, Maibach HI (2005) Comparative evaporimetry in man. Skin Res Technol 11:205–208
Angelova-Fischer I, Fischer TW, Zillikens D (2009) Die Kondensator-Kammer-Methode zur nicht-invasiven Beurteilung von irritativen Hautschäden und deren Regeneration: eine Pilotstudie. Derm Beruf Umwelt 57(3):125
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310
Imhof RE, Xiao P, Berg EP, Ciortea LI (2005) Rapid measurement of TEWL with a condenser-chamber instrument. In: 15th international meeting of the ISBS and 2nd ioint international meeting of ISBS and ISSI, Philadelphia, 2005, pp 1–7. Available from: http://www.biox.biz/Library/Conference/ConfContribDetails10.php
Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner J, Serup J (1990) Guidelines for transepidermal water loss (TEWL) measurement. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 22:164–178
Rogiers V (2001) EEMCO guidance for the assessment of transepidermal water loss in cosmetic sciences. Skin Pharmacol Appl Skin Physiol 14:117–128
Du Plessis J, Stefaniak A, Eloff F, John S, Agner T, Chou T-C et al (2013) International guidelines for the in vivo assessment of skin properties in non-clinical settings: part 2. Transepidermal water loss and skin hydration. Skin Res Technol 19(3):265–278
Barel AO, Clarys P (1995) Comparison of methods for measurement of transepidermal water loss. In: Serup J, Jemec GBE (eds) Handbook of non-invasive methods and the skin. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 179–184
Cohen JC, Hartman DG, Garofalo MJ, Basehoar A, Raynor B, Ashbrenner E et al (2009) Comparison of closed chamber and open chamber evaporimetry. Skin Res Technol 15:51–54
Acknowledgments
We thank Markus Steiner of Aberdeen University, Scotland, for providing the raw Tewameter-VapoMeter comparison data used in Fig. 31.3 and Jouni Nuutinen of Delfin Technologies Ltd, Finland, for providing unpublished VapoMeter angular response data.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Imhof, B., Xiao, P., Angelova-Fischer, I. (2014). TEWL, Closed-Chamber Methods: AquaFlux and VapoMeter. In: Berardesca, E., Maibach, H., Wilhelm, KP. (eds) Non Invasive Diagnostic Techniques in Clinical Dermatology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32109-2_31
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32109-2_31
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32108-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32109-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)