Cool versus warm water for facial cleansing: A randomized controlled clinical study of skin barrier, skin physiology, cleansing efficacy and water consumption.
Stewart Long, Kim Fenn, Kathryn Harvey, Pippa Ward, Callum O'Brien
{"title":"Cool versus warm water for facial cleansing: A randomized controlled clinical study of skin barrier, skin physiology, cleansing efficacy and water consumption.","authors":"Stewart Long, Kim Fenn, Kathryn Harvey, Pippa Ward, Callum O'Brien","doi":"10.1111/ics.70120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To quantify the effects of water temperature and tap-running behaviour during routine facial cleansing on skin barrier function, skin physiological parameters, make-up-removal efficacy and the associated water and energy consumption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a 10-day, randomized, controlled clinical study, 52 healthy adults (46 women, 6 men; aged 19-72 years) cleansed their face daily using ELEMIS Pro-Collagen Cleansing Balm under one of four conditions: cool or warm water, with the tap either turned off during cleansing or left running. Participants were blinded to the environmental objectives. Water usage was covertly recorded with calibrated meters on the hot and cold feed pipes. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL; Tewameter® TM 300), skin hydration (Corneometer® CM 825), skin pH (skin pH-meter PH 905) and skin radiance and translucency (TLS-850®, Diastron Ltd) were measured at baseline and on days 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10. Make-up-removal efficacy was evaluated colourimetrically following standardized light- and heavy-make-up regimens. Cumulative effects on TEWL were summarized as area under the curve (AUC) over 10 days. Between-group differences were tested with two-way ANOVA, the Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test; α = 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Warm-water cleansing used on average 27% more water per cleansing event than cool-water cleansing (p < 0.04). Repeated warm-water cleansing produced a statistically significant increase in TEWL of approximately 3.4 g·m<sup>-2</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup> at day 10 (p < 0.01), consistent with impairment of barrier function, whereas cool-water cleansing produced no significant change (Δ ≈ 1 g·m<sup>-2</sup>·h<sup>-1</sup>; p = 0.15). Cool-water cleansing was associated with a small but statistically significant fall in skin surface pH (Δ -0.4 pH units, p < 0.02), whereas pH was unchanged with warm water. Stratum-corneum hydration declined modestly in all groups. Make-up-removal efficacy did not differ significantly between water temperatures (p > 0.05 for all colourimetric comparisons), with both regimens returning skin colour values to baseline.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Routine facial cleansing with cool water preserves skin barrier integrity, supports a more favourable skin surface pH and matches the make-up-removal performance of warm-water cleansing while substantially reducing water and energy consumption. Cool-water cleansing offers a behaviourally accessible route to combine measurable skin benefits with a reduced environmental footprint.</p>","PeriodicalId":13936,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cosmetic Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cosmetic Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ics.70120","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To quantify the effects of water temperature and tap-running behaviour during routine facial cleansing on skin barrier function, skin physiological parameters, make-up-removal efficacy and the associated water and energy consumption.
Methods: In a 10-day, randomized, controlled clinical study, 52 healthy adults (46 women, 6 men; aged 19-72 years) cleansed their face daily using ELEMIS Pro-Collagen Cleansing Balm under one of four conditions: cool or warm water, with the tap either turned off during cleansing or left running. Participants were blinded to the environmental objectives. Water usage was covertly recorded with calibrated meters on the hot and cold feed pipes. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL; Tewameter® TM 300), skin hydration (Corneometer® CM 825), skin pH (skin pH-meter PH 905) and skin radiance and translucency (TLS-850®, Diastron Ltd) were measured at baseline and on days 1, 2, 4, 7 and 10. Make-up-removal efficacy was evaluated colourimetrically following standardized light- and heavy-make-up regimens. Cumulative effects on TEWL were summarized as area under the curve (AUC) over 10 days. Between-group differences were tested with two-way ANOVA, the Mann-Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test; α = 0.05.
Results: Warm-water cleansing used on average 27% more water per cleansing event than cool-water cleansing (p < 0.04). Repeated warm-water cleansing produced a statistically significant increase in TEWL of approximately 3.4 g·m-2·h-1 at day 10 (p < 0.01), consistent with impairment of barrier function, whereas cool-water cleansing produced no significant change (Δ ≈ 1 g·m-2·h-1; p = 0.15). Cool-water cleansing was associated with a small but statistically significant fall in skin surface pH (Δ -0.4 pH units, p < 0.02), whereas pH was unchanged with warm water. Stratum-corneum hydration declined modestly in all groups. Make-up-removal efficacy did not differ significantly between water temperatures (p > 0.05 for all colourimetric comparisons), with both regimens returning skin colour values to baseline.
Conclusion: Routine facial cleansing with cool water preserves skin barrier integrity, supports a more favourable skin surface pH and matches the make-up-removal performance of warm-water cleansing while substantially reducing water and energy consumption. Cool-water cleansing offers a behaviourally accessible route to combine measurable skin benefits with a reduced environmental footprint.
期刊介绍:
The Journal publishes original refereed papers, review papers and correspondence in the fields of cosmetic research. It is read by practising cosmetic scientists and dermatologists, as well as specialists in more diverse disciplines that are developing new products which contact the skin, hair, nails or mucous membranes.
The aim of the Journal is to present current scientific research, both pure and applied, in: cosmetics, toiletries, perfumery and allied fields. Areas that are of particular interest include: studies in skin physiology and interactions with cosmetic ingredients, innovation in claim substantiation methods (in silico, in vitro, ex vivo, in vivo), human and in vitro safety testing of cosmetic ingredients and products, physical chemistry and technology of emulsion and dispersed systems, theory and application of surfactants, new developments in olfactive research, aerosol technology and selected aspects of analytical chemistry.