Cargando…

Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films

BACKGROUND: Barrier films have been used for many years to protect skin from the damaging effects of excessive moisture and mechanical injury. The performance characteristics important for these protective effects are mainly product durability and its ability to reduce the force of adhesive removal....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bodkhe, Rajan B., Shrestha, Shrijana B., Unertl, Karl, Fetzik, Joseph, McNulty, Amy K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8596591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33760305
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13038
_version_ 1784600416373178368
author Bodkhe, Rajan B.
Shrestha, Shrijana B.
Unertl, Karl
Fetzik, Joseph
McNulty, Amy K.
author_facet Bodkhe, Rajan B.
Shrestha, Shrijana B.
Unertl, Karl
Fetzik, Joseph
McNulty, Amy K.
author_sort Bodkhe, Rajan B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Barrier films have been used for many years to protect skin from the damaging effects of excessive moisture and mechanical injury. The performance characteristics important for these protective effects are mainly product durability and its ability to reduce the force of adhesive removal. Additionally, the moisture vapor transmission rate through the film needs to be high enough that maceration is prevented. The current study was undertaken to investigate various physical performance characteristics of six commercially available barrier films. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several bench tests were used to simulate performance features of the barriers on skin including barrier durability, breathability (moisture vapor permeability), and the effect on adhesive dressing force of removal. RESULTS: Results indicated that barrier films did not perform equivalently. However, Cavilon™ No Sting Barrier Film (NSB) was shown to have significantly greater durability in the barrier integrity test than all other barriers tested and was tied for highest breathability and highest reduction in peel force from steel. No other tested barrier film performed as consistently across the different tests. CONCLUSION: These results may provide mechanistic understanding of how barriers such as NSB may clinically assist with the prevention of adhesive‐ and moisture‐related skin damage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8596591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85965912021-11-22 Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films Bodkhe, Rajan B. Shrestha, Shrijana B. Unertl, Karl Fetzik, Joseph McNulty, Amy K. Skin Res Technol Original Articles BACKGROUND: Barrier films have been used for many years to protect skin from the damaging effects of excessive moisture and mechanical injury. The performance characteristics important for these protective effects are mainly product durability and its ability to reduce the force of adhesive removal. Additionally, the moisture vapor transmission rate through the film needs to be high enough that maceration is prevented. The current study was undertaken to investigate various physical performance characteristics of six commercially available barrier films. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several bench tests were used to simulate performance features of the barriers on skin including barrier durability, breathability (moisture vapor permeability), and the effect on adhesive dressing force of removal. RESULTS: Results indicated that barrier films did not perform equivalently. However, Cavilon™ No Sting Barrier Film (NSB) was shown to have significantly greater durability in the barrier integrity test than all other barriers tested and was tied for highest breathability and highest reduction in peel force from steel. No other tested barrier film performed as consistently across the different tests. CONCLUSION: These results may provide mechanistic understanding of how barriers such as NSB may clinically assist with the prevention of adhesive‐ and moisture‐related skin damage. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-24 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8596591/ /pubmed/33760305 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13038 Text en © 2021 3M Company. Skin Research and Technology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Bodkhe, Rajan B.
Shrestha, Shrijana B.
Unertl, Karl
Fetzik, Joseph
McNulty, Amy K.
Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title_full Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title_fullStr Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title_short Comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
title_sort comparing the physical performance of liquid barrier films
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8596591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33760305
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13038
work_keys_str_mv AT bodkherajanb comparingthephysicalperformanceofliquidbarrierfilms
AT shresthashrijanab comparingthephysicalperformanceofliquidbarrierfilms
AT unertlkarl comparingthephysicalperformanceofliquidbarrierfilms
AT fetzikjoseph comparingthephysicalperformanceofliquidbarrierfilms
AT mcnultyamyk comparingthephysicalperformanceofliquidbarrierfilms