A comprehensive comparison of facial skin hydration based on capacitance and conductance measurements in Chinese women

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the data of conductance and capacitance measurements of facial skin hydration and to evaluate and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches. METHODS: We measured skin capacitance (Corneometer® CM 825) and skin conductance (Skicon‐200EX®) on 30 pre‐defined facial sites of 125 Chinese women, resulting in 3750 readings per device. The data were analysed and compared, and continuous colour maps were generated on a 3D avatar for capacitance, conductance, relative difference (Δ%) and correlation (R‐value) by interpolating between the individual readings and converting the values to colours. This visualization allows a better interpretation of the results. RESULTS: The complexity of facial skin hydration is revealed by this approach. The similarities and discrepancies in the facial hydration maps are clearly apparent. Due to the superiority of the Skicon in measuring high hydration levels, differences in skin hydration were evident on the forehead compared with the Corneometer maps, which may be related to the more superficial measurement of the Skicon within the stratum corneum. Conversely, a greater understanding of the complexity of facial skin hydration in the nasolabial fold was obvious when using the Corneometer. The best congruence between the instruments was found at two specific but separated facial areas, one around the inner eye region and the other one on a line between the nasolabial sulcus and the oblique, lateral jaw. Interestingly, the data were not normally distributed for both instruments and they had opposite skews. All facial clusters were statistically different from each other (p < 0.001), except the cheek and jaw for the Skicon. Larger than expected percentage coefficients of variance were found for the Corneometer on some facial sites that might be explainable by differences in stratum corneum physiology and biochemistry. Corneometer values of 48 AU and Skicon values of 132 μS were taken as the cutoff for normally hydrated facial skin. CONCLUSIONS: Both devices have their advantages and disadvantages suggesting that bio‐instrumental measurement of skin hydration is actually more complicated than commonly thought and that the different facial zones and the use of multiple instrumentation have not been adequately considered.