Skin Hydration Measurement: Comparison Between Devices and Clinical Evaluations.

Ju Heon Park, YoungHwan Choi, Yeon Joo Jung, Taemin Lee, Heeyeon Kim, Youngjoo Cho, Jong Hee Lee
{"title":"Skin Hydration Measurement: Comparison Between Devices and Clinical Evaluations.","authors":"Ju Heon Park, YoungHwan Choi, Yeon Joo Jung, Taemin Lee, Heeyeon Kim, Youngjoo Cho, Jong Hee Lee","doi":"10.5021/ad.23.103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The need for an objective method for measuring skin hydration levels is becoming increasingly important. Various devices with different measuring principles for assessing skin hydration have been developed and are widely used.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to investigate the reproducibility and correlation between clinical evaluation and skin hydration measurement devices that are the most widely used in the field.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective comparative clinical trial was conducted on 184 healthy volunteers. Skin hydration levels were measured using the Corneometer (CM820) and hydration probe (HP: DermaLab Combo) at 3 points: the ventral forearm, the dorsal forearm, and the shin. We used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to evaluate the reproducibility and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC) to evaluate the correlation of each measurement. Simple linear regression was used to analyze the Corneometer and HP skin hydration value changes according to changes in xerosis severity scale (XSS) values, which were evaluated by clinicians.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the Corneometer and HP showed significant, excellent reproducibility (ICC for Corneometer: 0.954-0.971, ICC for HP: 0.980-0.986) and significant high positive correlations (PCC: 0.708-0.737) regardless of the measurement site. Both devices showed negative regression coefficients in all measurement sites in XSS analysis, but this was not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Corneometer and HP were both accurate and objective skin hydration measuring devices, regardless of the measurement site. Using reliable and objective devices such as the Corneometer or HP can aid in understanding an individual's skin condition and making more informed decisions for skin care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0005146.</p>","PeriodicalId":94298,"journal":{"name":"Annals of dermatology","volume":"36 5","pages":"275-281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11439984/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5021/ad.23.103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The need for an objective method for measuring skin hydration levels is becoming increasingly important. Various devices with different measuring principles for assessing skin hydration have been developed and are widely used.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the reproducibility and correlation between clinical evaluation and skin hydration measurement devices that are the most widely used in the field.

Methods: A prospective comparative clinical trial was conducted on 184 healthy volunteers. Skin hydration levels were measured using the Corneometer (CM820) and hydration probe (HP: DermaLab Combo) at 3 points: the ventral forearm, the dorsal forearm, and the shin. We used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to evaluate the reproducibility and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC) to evaluate the correlation of each measurement. Simple linear regression was used to analyze the Corneometer and HP skin hydration value changes according to changes in xerosis severity scale (XSS) values, which were evaluated by clinicians.

Results: Both the Corneometer and HP showed significant, excellent reproducibility (ICC for Corneometer: 0.954-0.971, ICC for HP: 0.980-0.986) and significant high positive correlations (PCC: 0.708-0.737) regardless of the measurement site. Both devices showed negative regression coefficients in all measurement sites in XSS analysis, but this was not statistically significant.

Conclusion: The Corneometer and HP were both accurate and objective skin hydration measuring devices, regardless of the measurement site. Using reliable and objective devices such as the Corneometer or HP can aid in understanding an individual's skin condition and making more informed decisions for skin care.

Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0005146.

皮肤水合测量:设备与临床评估之间的比较。
背景:对测量皮肤水合水平的客观方法的需求正变得越来越重要。目前已开发并广泛使用了各种测量原理不同的皮肤水合度评估设备:本研究旨在调查临床评估与该领域最广泛使用的皮肤水合测量设备之间的重现性和相关性:方法:对 184 名健康志愿者进行了前瞻性比较临床试验。使用角膜计(CM820)和水合探针(HP:DermaLab Combo)在前臂腹侧、前臂背侧和胫骨 3 个点测量皮肤水合水平。我们使用类内相关系数(ICC)来评估重现性,使用皮尔逊相关系数(PCC)来评估每次测量的相关性。根据临床医生评估的皮肤干燥严重程度量表(XSS)值的变化,采用简单线性回归分析角膜计和 HP 皮肤水合值的变化:结果:角膜计和 HP 都显示出显著、出色的重现性(角膜计的 ICC:0.954-0.971,HP 的 ICC:0.980-0.986)和显著的高正相关性(PCC:0.708-0.737),与测量部位无关。在 XSS 分析中,两种仪器在所有测量点的回归系数均为负值,但在统计学上并不显著:结论:无论测量部位如何,角膜计和 HP 都是准确、客观的皮肤水合测量设备。使用角膜计或 HP 等可靠、客观的设备有助于了解个人的皮肤状况,为皮肤护理做出更明智的决定:临床研究信息服务标识符:KCT0005146:KCT0005146.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信