The effect of 4 barrier creams on the absorption of water, benzene, and formaldehyde into excised human skin

The effect of 4 barrier creams on the absorption of (3H)-water (14C)-benzene and (14C)-formaldehyde into excised human skin was studied. The control skin and the barrier cream treated skin were exposed to the test substance for 0.5 hr, whereupon the amount absorbed was determined. The results indicated that the experimental cream "Water barrier" reduced the absorption of water and benzene but not formaldehyde. Kerodex 71 cream slightly reduced the absorption of benzene and formaldehyde. The barrier creams Petrogard and "Solvent barrier" did not affect the absorption of any of the substances studied. The use of these creams against percutaneous absorption is questioned.     

In-situ evaluation of barrier-cream performance on human skin using laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy

Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) was used to evaluate the effect of barrier creams (skin protective creams) on human skin. A Nd: YAG laser at 1,064 nm was used with a pulse energy of 100 mJ. A method was developed to measure the effectiveness of barrier creams against zinc ion absorption from aqueous zinc chloride solution and oil paste zinc oxide, which represent model hydrophilic and lipophilic metal compounds, respectively. Zinc was chosen since it posed no risk to human skin. 3 representative commercial barrier creams advertised as being effective against lipophilic and hydrophilic substances were evaluated by measuring zinc absorbed through the stratum corneum. 4 consecutive skin surface biopsies (SSB) were taken from biceps of the forearms of 6 volunteers at time periods of 0.5 h and 3 h after application of the protective cream. Results were compared with control skin where no barrier cream was used. The zinc atomic emission line at 213.9 nm was selected. Gate delay and gate width time was optimized to obtain the best signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and precision. This method provided a facile and rapid screening of the effectiveness of skin barrier creams against zinc ion penetration. The barrier creams were shown to provide appreciable protection against the penetration of both ZnCl2 and ZnO into the skin.     

Cutting oil dermatitis on guinea pig skin

We assessed the effect of repeated application of cutting oil on 9 guinea pigs' skin by visual scoring and skin water vapour loss measurement. The visual scores (severity score) were significantly higher on skin treated with cutting oil (positive control) compared to untreated skin (negative control). The corresponding mean SVL values were also significantly higher. We also assessed the effect of 2 barrier creams on the 9 guinea pigs' skin treated with cutting oil. The visual scores on skin treated with either barrier cream were significantly higher than positive control skin. The corresponding mean SVL values on skin treated with either barrier cream were also higher (not statistically significant). It appeared that the 2 barrier creams did not confer protection against the irritant effect of the cutting oil. On the contrary, barrier creams appeared to exacerbate the irritant effect of cutting oil.     

Hydrogel barrier/repair creams and contact dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Barrier creams are important to protect the skin in occupations with chemical exposure. The value of hydrogels in barrier creams has never been studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current technology in barrier cream formulation and explore the utility of hygrogels in skin protection. METHODS: A total of 80 men, women, and children between the ages of newborn to 80 years >were studied with the following dermatologic conditions: household hand dermatitis (21), occupational hand dermatitis (18), latex glove irritant contact dermatitis (9), diaper dermatitis (5), cutaneous wounds (17), and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) (10). In this study, the investigators used a split body approach, in a double-blind randomized fashion, where one body site was treated with a traditional petrolatum-based cream while the other body site was treated with a hydrogel-based barrier/repair cream. Both subject and investigator assessments were recorded by questionnaire. RESULTS: The hydrogel barrier/repair cream showed better skin improvement than the petrolatum-based cream in both subject assessment (62%, P =.0048) and investigator assessment (75%, P =.0000003). CONCLUSION: Hydrogel barrier/repair creams might represent a new, effective approach to skin protection.     

Evaluation of barrier creams against sulphur mustard. I. In vitro studies using human skin

The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a range of passive and reactive barrier cream formulations against the chemical warfare agent sulphur mustard (SM) using an in vitro diffusion cell system containing human skin. In general, proprietary formulations were relatively effective under occluded conditions, but ineffective under unoccluded conditions. For example, SM skin absorption rates through occluded control and Stokoderm pre-treated skin were 538 +/- 193 and 200 +/- 51 microg x cm(-2) x h(-1), respectively (p < 0.05). Under unoccluded conditions, control and Stokoderm pre-treated skin absorption rates were 4.41 +/- 1.90 and 36.84 +/- 15.19 microg x cm(-2) x h(-1) (p < 0.05). Novel (perfluorinated) barrier creams were generally more effective under unoccluded conditions; pre-treatment with one formulation led to an 18-fold reduction in skin absorption rate and reduced the total amount of SM penetrated by 95% of the applied dose. Several proprietary formulations also had adverse effects on the effectiveness of the skin decontaminant fuller's earth. The rate (Jss) and total amount (percentage of dose) of SM absorbed through the skin were deemed to be independent parameters of barrier cream performance. These data indicate that (1) perceived conditions of use, (2) compatibility with existing protective equipment and (3) the rate and extent of SM skin absorption must all be taken into account when evaluating barrier creams in vitro.     

Water protective effect of barrier creams and moisturizing creams: a new in vivo test method

Frequent exposure to water is an important risk factor for the development of irritant hand eczema. Evaluation of cream efficacy in protecting against water is difficult. A new non-irritant, non-invasive method is introduced, based on evaluation of colour intensities when an aqueous solution of crystal violet is applied to the skin, after pretreatment with different creams. By skin reflectance measurement, differences in colour intensity were objectified. Measurements of transepidermal water loss were also performed. 2 barrier creams and a moisturizer were tested on the dorsal and volar aspects of the handy One barrier cream contained silicone the other solid particles. The moisturizer had a high content of lipid. In one experiment, the immediate effect of the cream in protecting against water was evaluated. In a second experiment, the water resistancy of the creams was tested, using a standard water immersion procedure (4X20 min). The barrier cream with particles gave the best immediate protection (dorsal 76% volar 69%). The moisturizer was intermediately protective (dorsal 57% volar 34%) while very link protection was found for the silicone-containing cream (dorsal 16% volar 10%). The water immersion procedure resulted in only minor changes in protection for each cream. When comparing transepidermal water loss in the treated areas with pretreatment values, a reduction was recorded only for the particle-containing barrier cream. The colour method described may be used as a quick and easy test of the protective effect of creams against water.     

Methods for the evaluation of barrier creams

Barrier creams are used extensively in industry to protect the hands from chemical injury. They are also prescribed to protect the skin when inflamed from further damage in such conditions as hand eczema and napkin dermatitis. Despite their wide usage very little is known concerning their efficacy as there are no established methods for their assessment. In this study we describe a new technique for the evaluation of barrier creams and assess an adaptation of another recently described method.
In the new technique the ability of barrier creams to prevent a variety of dyes in different solvents from contacting the skin has been assessed. The excluding properties of the barrier creams was measured by taking skin surface biopsies and measuring the amount of dye reaching the skin spectrophotometrically as a function of time from exposure. The other method assesses the ability of weak alkalis to cross the barrier cream by measuring the time taken to induce increased blood flow (measured by the laser Doppler flow meter) after application of the test materials.
Both tests succeeded in demonstrating that barrier creams inhibit the penetration of the test substances. However, the barrier properties were time-dependent as well as varying with the particular preparation used. For example, using 0·1 % methyl violet in water as a test substance it was found that a 'water barrier' preparation inhibited penetration to skin up to 90% of control values at 15 min, but only 75% at i hour, whereas the figures for a solvent barrier were 72% and 55%- We believe that such assessments are vital in order both to understand the properties of barrier creams and recommend their correct usage.     

Changes in skin barrier function following long-term treatment with moisturizers, a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Moisturizers are commonly used by patients with dry skin conditions as well as people with healthy skin. Previous studies on short-term treatment have shown that moisturizers can weaken or strengthen skin barrier function and also influence skin barrier recovery. However, knowledge of the effects on skin barrier function of long-term treatment with moisturizers is still scarce. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of long-term treatment with moisturizers on the barrier function of normal skin, as measured by transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and susceptibility to an irritant, and to relate those effects to the composition of the designed experimental moisturizers. METHODS: Volunteers (n = 78) were randomized into five groups. Each group treated one volar forearm for 7 weeks with one of the following preparations: (i) one of three simplified creams, containing only a few ingredients in order to minimize the complexity of the system; (ii) a lipid-free gel; (iii) one ordinary cream, containing 5% urea, which has previously been shown to decrease TEWL. The lipids in the simplified creams were either hydrocarbons or vegetable triglyceride oil, and one of them also contained 5% urea. After 7 weeks, treated and control forearms were exposed for 24 h to sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) using a patch test. TEWL, blood flow and skin capacitance of both SLS-exposed and undamaged skin were evaluated 24 h after removal of patches. Additionally, a 24-h irritancy patch test of all test preparations was performed on 11 volunteers in order to check their possible acute irritancy potential. RESULTS: Changes were found in the barrier function of normal skin after 7 weeks of treatment with the test preparations. The simplified creams and the lipid-free gel increased TEWL and skin response to SLS, while the ordinary cream had the opposite effect. One of the simplified creams also decreased skin capacitance. All test preparations were shown to be nonirritant, both by short-term irritancy patch test and by measurement of blood flow after long-term treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Moisturizers influence the skin barrier function of normal skin, as measured by TEWL and susceptibility to SLS. Moreover, the effect on skin barrier function is determined by the composition of the moisturizer. The ingredients which influence the skin barrier function need to be identified, and the mechanism clarified at the molecular level.     

Percutaneous penetration of hydrocortisone in humans following skin delipidization by 1:1:1 trichlorethane

The effect of skin delipidization in humans on the percutaneous penetration of hydrocortisone was investigated in a cross-over trial. The delipidizing agent was 1:1:1 trichloroethane, a common industrial organic solvent. The findings do not show any significant difference in the topical absorption of hydrocortisone with and without skin delipidization. It was postulated that the natural skin barrier was reestablished by the metabolic cutaneous lipid regeneration concomitant with the absorption of the fatty ingredients from the cream.     

Barrier recovery and influence of irritant stimuli in skin treated with a moisturizing cream

Moisturizers are used daily by many people to alleviate symptoms of clinically and subjectively dry skin. Recent studies suggest that certain ingredients in creams may accelerate the recovery of a disrupted barrier and decrease the skin susceptibility to irritant stimuli. In the present single-blind study, a moisturizing cream was tested for its influence both on barrier recovery in surfuctant-damaged skin and on the susceptibility of normal skin to exposure to the irritant sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS). Parameters measured were transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and skin corneometer values, indicating degree of hydration. Treatment of surfactant-damaged skin with the test cream for 14 days promoted barrier recovery, as observed as a decrease in TEWL. Skin corneometer values also normalized more rapidly during the treatment. In normal skin, use or the test cream significantly reduced TFWL after 14 days of treatment, and irritant reactions to SLS were, significantly decreased. Skin corneometer values increased after only 1 application and remained elevated after 14 days. In conclusion, the accelerated rate of recovery of surfactant-damaged skin and the lower degree of SLS-induced irritation in normal skin treated with the test cream may be of clinical relevance in attempts to reduce contact dermatitis due to irritant stimuli.     

Efficacy of skin barrier creams

An animal model for the evaluation of skin protective creams against chemical irritants is described. The irritants were applied daily for 2 weeks to shaved back skin of young guinea pigs: sodium tauryl sulphate (5% aq.: 30 min), sodium hydroxide (0,5% aq.; 2 min). and toluene (20'i. eth.; 2 mint. "The harrier cream was applied 2 h prior to and immediately after exposure to the irritant. Control animals were treated with the irritant only. The irritant reaction was scored on a 4–point scale for erythema and quantified with regard to transepidennal water loss (TEWL) by evaporime-try and skin blood flow volume (BFV) by laser Doppler velocimetry. A total of 90 guinea pigs, consisting of" individual panels of 5 to 10 animals, was tested. While one barrier cream (Slokoderm) significantly suppressed the irritation due 10 sodium lauryl sulphate and toluene, the other (Contra-Alkalh failed to do so and even aggravated the response, which was particularly evident with sodium hydroxide. This model may be useful in developing more effective barrier creams.     

Bioengineering measurements of barrier creams efficacy against toluene and NaOH in an in vivo single irritation test

Background/aims: By now, only a few models have been published with the goal of testing barrier creams in vivo in humans. The aim of this study was to evaluate with a single irritation test, barriers creams in humans against a lipophilic and a hydrophilic irritant, toluene and NaOH, respectively.
Methods: Both irritants were applied for 15 min after pretreatment of the skin with barrier creams. Non-invasive bioengineering methods, such as skin colorimetry (a*) and cutaneous blood flow (CBF) measurements were used to assess product protection.
Results: After toluene application on control sites, the irritation appeared quickly (T_max=3 min after patch removal), was significant (+5-6 units for a* and+80% for CBF) and did not return to base value within 1 h. Skin irritation after NaOH application, as measured by a*, was less important (+2 units) and occurred later ( T "max=40 min after patch removal). For this irritant, CBF response was minor and variable. When testing barrier properties of the products, none of them were able to prevent the skin erythema induced by toluene. Against NaOH, one barrier cream as well as petrolatum and a fatty cream protected the skin significantly.
Conclusion: The present study points out the unsatisfactory effectiveness of several commercially available barrier creams claimed to protect against lipophilic or hydrophilic irritants.     

Allergic contact dermatitis from di-isodecyl phthatate in a polyvinyl chloride identity band

An animal model for the evaluation of skin protective creams against chemical irritants is described. The irritants were applied daily for 2 weeks to shaved back skin of young guinea pigs: sodium tauryl sulphate (5% aq.: 30 min), sodium hydroxide (0,5% aq.; 2 min). and toluene (20′i. eth.; 2 mint. “The harrier cream was applied 2 h prior to and immediately after exposure to the irritant. Control animals were treated with the irritant only. The irritant reaction was scored on a 4–point scale for erythema and quantified with regard to transepidennal water loss (TEWL) by evaporime-try and skin blood flow volume (BFV) by laser Doppler velocimetry. A total of 90 guinea pigs, consisting of” individual panels of 5 to 10 animals, was tested. While one barrier cream (Slokoderm) significantly suppressed the irritation due 10 sodium lauryl sulphate and toluene, the other (Contra-Alkalh failed to do so and even aggravated the response, which was particularly evident with sodium hydroxide. This model may be useful in developing more effective barrier creams.     

An in vivo model to evaluate the efficacy of barrier creams on the level of skin penetration of chemicals

The reservoir function and the barrier function are important properties of the skin. The reservoir function is dependent on the barrier function which, however, needs support by protective measures, in particular under working conditions. Barrier creams represent a possibility to protect the skin. In the present study, a method was developed to investigate the effectiveness of reservoir closure by different formulations. Patent Blue V in water was used as a model penetrant. Its penetration, with and without barrier cream treatment, was analyzed by tape stripping in combination with UV/VIS spectroscopic measurements. The investigations showed that the stratum corneum represents a reservoir for topically applied Patent Blue V in water. Furthermore, the barrier investigations showed that vaseline and bees wax form a 100% barrier on the skin surface. The third barrier cream, containing waxes and surfactant, only partially showed a protective effect against the penetration of Patent Blue V in water. Strong interindividual differences were observed for this barrier product. In conclusion, it was assumed that the application of barrier creams cannot replace other protective measures and should be maximally used to inhibit low-grade irritants or in combination with other protectants or in body areas where other protective measures are not applicable.     

Instrumental and dermatologist evaluation of the effect of glycerine and urea on dry skin in atopic dermatitis

Background/aims: Moisturising creams are useful treatment adjuncts in inflammatory dermatoses and have beneficial effects in the treatment of dry, scaly skin. The effects on dryness and skin permeability of a new moisturising cream with 20% glycerine was compared with its placebo and with a medicinally authorised cream with 4% urea (combined with 4% sodium chloride) in the treatment of dry skin.
Methods: Patients ( n =109) with atopic dermatitis were treated for 30 days with a moisturiser in a randomised, parallel and double-blind fashion. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and skin capacitance were assessed instrumentally, and changes in the dryness of the skin were assessed by the dermatologist.
Results: No difference in TEWL was found between glycerine treatment and its placebo, whereas a lower value was found in the urea-treated area compared to the glycerine-treated area. No difference in skin capacitance was found. The clinical assessment of dryness showed urea to be superior to glycerine in treating the condition.
Conclusions: Moisturising creams are different, not only with respect to composition but also with respect to their influence on skin as a barrier to water in patients with atopic dermatitis.     

Correlation between the greasiness and the plasticizing effect of moisturizers

Moisturizers are used as cosmetics and as adjuvant therapy in dermatology. The strength or relative efficacy of moisturizers is poorly described and thus advising patients is difficult. It has been suggested that lipidization of the skin by moisturizers and the changes in skin mechanics following the application of a moisturizer may be useful measures of outcome. The aim of this study is to describe the relative efficacy of 5 different moisturizers, a barrier cream and a gel in terms of changes in skin mechanics and electrical capacitance before and after application. Assessment of the greasiness or absorption of the cream was made by standardized blotting of unabsorbed residue. Lipid-rich creams (Vaseline, Locobase and Decubal creme) caused increased skin distensibility, while no differences were found in hysteresis changes. In contrast, the relative efficacy in increasing skin capacitance was significantly greater in the moisturizers with a lower lipid content (Clinique, Nivea) and gel. The results suggest that lipidization is of major importance to the plasticity of the skin. When moisturizers are used to improve skin plasticity it is suggested that lipid-rich formulations be used. Cosmetically more acceptable creams and gel were however better at increasing skin capacitance which has been interpreted as a measure of skin hydration. The difference may reflect a design adaptation of these creams to a specific outcome measure and our results raise the question of appropriate outcome measures and our results raise the question of appropriate outcome measures in future moisturizer studies.     

Locobase Repair ® cream following CO 2 laser skin resurfacing reduces interstitial fluid oozing

BACKGROUND: The cosmetic result after laser resurfacing depends not only on the type of laser and the technique used, but also on post-treatment care. The efficacy of Locobase Repair ® cream, which improves skin barrier function due to its content of natural skin analogue fats and cholesterol, was investigated. METHODS: A total of 18 Caucasian patients underwent resurfacing for acne scars. Laser treatment was performed with a Sharplan 1020 CO 2 laser and a Silk Touch scanner. Locobase Repair cream (a water-in-oil cream with 63% lipids including natural components of stratum corneum: cholesterol, ceramide and free fatty acids) was applied daily to one side of the face and petrolatum was applied to the other. In addition, both sides were treated with a 2% fusidic acid cream. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction of oozing during the first 2 days after CO 2 laser treatment on the sides treated with Locobase Repair cream ( p < 0.05), CO 2 laser while from day 3 to day 7 no differences were demonstrated between the Locobase Repair cream and petrolatum. For the other parameters scored (scaling, oedema, erythema and pain), no significant differences between Locobase Repair cream and petrolatum were found. Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the two creams regarding the duration of wound healing and final cosmetic outcome. In all, 62% of the patients preferred to use Locobase Repair cream during the postoperative period, and 11% preferred petrolatum. The remaining 27% expressed no preferences. CONCLUSION: The use of Locobase Repair cream as a post laser resurfacing treatment reduces tissue fluid oozing during the first 2 postoperative days, indicating a quick restoration of skin barrier and hence possibly a reduction in the incidence of wound infections as well as enhancing patient compliance due to less fluid oozing.     

Comparative clinical trial of a new trihalogenated dermatocorticoid (halometasone) versus betamethasone dipropionate

In a multicenter controlled study carried out in Austria and Switzerland by 8 dermatologists in 208 patients with acute eczematous dermatoses, 0.05% halometasone cream proved to have significantly superior clinical efficacy than 0.05% betamethasone dipropionate cream (P much less than 0.05) showing an equal tolerability. Good to very good results were reported in 93% of the patients treated with halometasone and in 84% of those treated with betamethasone dipropionate creams (Diprosone, Diproderm). General tolerability of both treatments was good. Neither skin atrophy nor any systemic adverse effect, due to the transcutaneous absorption of the corticoids, were observed in this study.     

Radical protection in the visible and infrared by a hyperforin‐rich cream – in vivo versus ex vivo methods

The formation of radicals plays an important role in the development of atopic eczema or barrier‐disrupted skin. We evaluated the radical scavenging effect of a cream containing a Hypericum perforatum extract rich in hyperforin in a double‐blind placebo‐controlled study on 11 healthy volunteers. Electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy was applied to determine radical formation during VIS/NIR irradiation of the inner forearm. The results were compared to ex vivo investigations on excised porcine ear skin after a single application of the creams. The non‐treated skin was measured as control. The absolute values and the kinetics are not comparable for ex vivo and in vivo radical formation. Whereas in vivo, the radical production decreases with time, it remains stable ex vivo over the investigated timescale. Nevertheless, ex vivo methods could be developed to estimate the protection efficiency of creams. In vivo as well as ex vivo, the radical formation could be reduced by almost 80% when applying the hyperforin‐rich cream onto the skin, whereas placebo resulted in about 60%. In vivo, a daylong protection effect could be validated after a 4‐week application time of the cream indicating that a regular application is necessary to obtain the full effect.     

Protective effect of barrier creams and spray coatings against epoxy resins

This study evaluates the protective capacity of 4 barrier creams and 2 methacrylate spray coatings against skin contact with epoxy resins. The effect of these materials on the strength and on the surface area of patch test reactions caused by epoxy resin was assessed in 11 volunteers with a known allergy to epoxy resins. Standard amounts of barrier cream and spray coating were applied on the skin. Then patch tests were carried out with epoxy resin on the pretreated sites. After 24 h patches were removed, 48 h thereafter the strength and surface area of the reactions were scored. Results were compared with the score of a control test. The use of 2 barrier creams resulted in a significant reduction of the surface area of the patch test reactions. Spray coatings significantly reduced both the strength and the surface area of the reactions. Our results suggest that methacrylate spray coatings and barrier creams may provide protection against epoxy resins during a test period of 24 h. However, the development of new formulations, adapted more specifically to this purpose, is necessary.