Cargando…

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

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to examine the reliability and measurement error of devices that measure transepidermal water loss (TEWL). INTRODUCTION: TEWL is a physiological property of skin which increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilised measure of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Klotz, Tanja, Ibrahim, Abdullah, Maddern, Guy, Caplash, Yugesh, Wagstaff, Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9907714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35411958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13159
_version_ 1784884228645715968
author Klotz, Tanja
Ibrahim, Abdullah
Maddern, Guy
Caplash, Yugesh
Wagstaff, Marcus
author_facet Klotz, Tanja
Ibrahim, Abdullah
Maddern, Guy
Caplash, Yugesh
Wagstaff, Marcus
author_sort Klotz, Tanja
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to examine the reliability and measurement error of devices that measure transepidermal water loss (TEWL). INTRODUCTION: TEWL is a physiological property of skin which increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilised measure of skin barrier integrity. Devices measuring TEWL are available as open, semi‐open or closed chamber. Studies of reliability examine the consistency of measurement, and/or responsiveness whereas measurement error scores in absolute terms the amount of error due to sources of variation. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies examining the reliability and/or measurement error of TEWL measurement devices were included. Studies that only report on measurement of TEWL outcomes without examination of reliability and/or measurement error were excluded. METHODS: The search strategy aimed to locate published and unpublished studies. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, utilising identified keywords and limited to studies in English. Grey literature sources were searched to identify any unpublished documents. Study selection using the inclusion criteria was then assessed by two reviewers for methodological quality utilising the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias tool to assess the reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments. RESULTS: A total of 22 devices were examined in the 38 included studies. The quality of study design was on average rated as ‘Adequate’ however reliability and measurement error statistical methods were on average rated as ‘Doubtful’. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: TEWL measurement devices were found to demonstrate good reliability and frequently correlated with other devices. However, measurement error was highly variable but improves under in vitro conditions. Future research should consider risk of bias factors when designing studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9907714
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99077142023-04-13 Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties Klotz, Tanja Ibrahim, Abdullah Maddern, Guy Caplash, Yugesh Wagstaff, Marcus Skin Res Technol Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to examine the reliability and measurement error of devices that measure transepidermal water loss (TEWL). INTRODUCTION: TEWL is a physiological property of skin which increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilised measure of skin barrier integrity. Devices measuring TEWL are available as open, semi‐open or closed chamber. Studies of reliability examine the consistency of measurement, and/or responsiveness whereas measurement error scores in absolute terms the amount of error due to sources of variation. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Studies examining the reliability and/or measurement error of TEWL measurement devices were included. Studies that only report on measurement of TEWL outcomes without examination of reliability and/or measurement error were excluded. METHODS: The search strategy aimed to locate published and unpublished studies. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, utilising identified keywords and limited to studies in English. Grey literature sources were searched to identify any unpublished documents. Study selection using the inclusion criteria was then assessed by two reviewers for methodological quality utilising the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias tool to assess the reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments. RESULTS: A total of 22 devices were examined in the 38 included studies. The quality of study design was on average rated as ‘Adequate’ however reliability and measurement error statistical methods were on average rated as ‘Doubtful’. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: TEWL measurement devices were found to demonstrate good reliability and frequently correlated with other devices. However, measurement error was highly variable but improves under in vitro conditions. Future research should consider risk of bias factors when designing studies. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9907714/ /pubmed/35411958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13159 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Skin Research and Technology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is noncommercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Klotz, Tanja
Ibrahim, Abdullah
Maddern, Guy
Caplash, Yugesh
Wagstaff, Marcus
Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title_full Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title_fullStr Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title_full_unstemmed Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title_short Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties
title_sort devices measuring transepidermal water loss: a systematic review of measurement properties
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9907714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35411958
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/srt.13159
work_keys_str_mv AT klotztanja devicesmeasuringtransepidermalwaterlossasystematicreviewofmeasurementproperties
AT ibrahimabdullah devicesmeasuringtransepidermalwaterlossasystematicreviewofmeasurementproperties
AT maddernguy devicesmeasuringtransepidermalwaterlossasystematicreviewofmeasurementproperties
AT caplashyugesh devicesmeasuringtransepidermalwaterlossasystematicreviewofmeasurementproperties
AT wagstaffmarcus devicesmeasuringtransepidermalwaterlossasystematicreviewofmeasurementproperties