Validation of a novel patient‐operated device for measuring skin barrier function in atopic dermatitis

Abstract

Skin barrier measurements such as transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and surface capacitance provide objective information to clinicians regarding skin barrier integrity and functionality. 1,2 TEWL is a measure of epidermal permeability, 2 while surface capacitance provides information about stratum corneum (SC) hydration. Both TEWL and capacitance measurements are abnormal in atopic dermatitis (AD), with an increase in TEWL and decrease in capacitance.Previous barrier studies demonstrated elevated TEWL values on both lesional and nonlesional AD skin, 3 with the degree to which TEWL was increased correlating with disease severity. 4 Capacitance (often referred to as hydration or SC hydration) was also decreased on both lesional and nonlesional skin in patients with AD. 5 Clinical

Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties

“…The AquaFlux was included in seven of the included studies 30,31,33,45–48 . The studies were predominantly conducted in in vivo conditions.…”

“…It was weakly correlated with the AquaFlux in one study 45 but correlated well in two other studies. 46,47 Both devices showed greater variation from other devices as higher values of TEWL…”

“…AquaFlux AF200 180 7 30,31,33,[45][46][47][48] Baseline TEWL measured with AquaFlux at zero time is correlated with the flux rate of tritiated water (p = 0.04, r 2 = 0.34). Pearson's correlation coefficient is 0.58 for AquaFlux and Vapometer and 0.88 for Tewameter and AquaFlux on human forearms.…”

“…There appears to have been an influx of studies completed utilising the GPSkin devices, with seven studies published over the last 2 years. 28,[45][46][47][48][49][50] Further investigation uncovered that three of the studies had devices provided by the manufacturer of the device, GPower, however two of these studies were completed by the same author. 45,46,48 Across all the studies the average rating for the quality of the statistics for reliability and measurement error was 'Doubtful' .…”

“…28,[45][46][47][48][49][50] Further investigation uncovered that three of the studies had devices provided by the manufacturer of the device, GPower, however two of these studies were completed by the same author. 45,46,48 Across all the studies the average rating for the quality of the statistics for reliability and measurement error was 'Doubtful' . For reliability, only seven studies achieving a result of 'Very Good' as they utilised ICC statistics, and described the model which matched the study design.…”