Investigating the influence of intermittent and continuous mechanical loading on skin through non-invasive sampling of IL-1α

Soetens, J.F.J.; Worsley, Peter; Bader, Dan L.; Oomens, C.W.J.

doi:10.1016/j.jtv.2018.12.003

Cited by 27 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In all three groups, a comparable median increase was observed, ranging from 1.1 to 1.3 pg/μg. While Worsley et al and Soetens et al compared the IL‐1α levels via ratios by using a baseline normalization approach, we decided to compare the median differences of baseline and after treatment measurements, as it is not known at present time whether the comparison of relative changes is more appropriate than the comparison of absolute changes to reflect protective effects of dressings 38,39 . Furthermore, there is still uncertainty on how exactly an increase of IL‐1α is associated with mechanical loading.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the effects of three different multilayer dressings for pressure ulcer prevention on sacral skin after prolonged loading: An exploratory crossover trial

Lechner

Rancan

Hadam

et al. 2020

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence suggests that preventive dressings applied on sacral skin help to prevent pressure ulcers. However, possible performance differences of different dressing types are unclear. An exploratory randomized crossover trial with intra‐individual comparisons was conducted to compare the effects of three different multi‐layer foam dressings (Mepilex Border Sacrum, ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and Optifoam Gentle Sacrum) compared to no dressing on the sacral skin. Healthy female volunteers (n = 12, mean age 72 years) wore three different dressings on their sacral skin for 3.5 hours while lying supine on a standard hospital mattress. At regular intervals, subjects performed standardized movements to enhance shear loads. Skin surface temperature, stratum corneum hydration, erythema, skin roughness and the interleukin 1 alpha (IL‐1α) concentration per total protein were measured at baseline and after the lying periods. After 3.5 hours, the median skin temperature increased in all four groups between 3.0°C and 3.8°C with only minor differences between the no dressing and the dressing groups. Median stratum corneum hydration increased during the lying period in all groups with highest increases in the Optifoam Gentle Sacrum (7.3 arbitrary units) and no dressing group (7.0 arbitrary units). There was a median decrease of the mean roughness (Rz) in the Optifoam Gentle Sacrum group of −6.3 μm but no relevant changes in the other groups. After loading, the erythema index was highest in the ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and no dressing groups. Highest releases of IL‐1α were observed in the ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and Optifoam Gentle Sacrum groups, in the Mepilex Border Sacrum group changes were minor. Study results indicate, that the application of preventive dressings on sacral skin during loading do not cause additional occlusion compared to loading without dressings when lying supine. Different dressings cause different cutaneous responses during loading.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the effects of three different multilayer dressings for pressure ulcer prevention on sacral skin after prolonged loading: An exploratory crossover trial

Lechner

Rancan

Hadam

et al. 2020

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fig 2 shows how progressive loss of cytoskeletal and plasma membrane integrity in these cells impairs their control over mass transport and homeostasis. 47 In ammatory mediators 48 secreted from damaged and nearby immune cells lead to progressive in ammatory oedema, which increases interstitial pressures, the mechanical distortions of cells and tissues, and the growing obstructions within the vasculature and lymphatics. 49 Damage may be ampli ed in ischaemic tissue after reperfusion through the release of reactive oxygen species (ROS), termed reperfusion injury.…”

Section: Distorting Effect Of Frictionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…e panel proposes that, in the future, visual skin assessments should be replaced with technology-aided skin evaluation procedures that use, for example, biophysical markers (such as tissue biocapacitance) or biomechanical markers (such as in ammatory mediators collected at the skin) to indicate skin health and extrapolate risk. 48,62,93 It may be possible to include visual markers on the device that can indicate load, tissue status, alert sta of the need to initiate other risk measures, monitor biomarkers and change colour when thresholds are detected.…”

Section: Requirements For Future Risk Assessment Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Device-related pressure ulcers: SECURE prevention

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Research regarding skin and tissue assessment and early detection of pressure injury is advancing [63]. More recent advances include bioengineering techniques to measure skin and tissue status during and after loading such as transepidermal water loss [63,64], skin and tissue hydration [63,65], (skin) blood flow [66][67][68], skin markers such as interleukins [66,69], microclimate measurements [63,70], ultrasound to detect edema and structural tissue changes [71,72], and infrared Table 2 Key considerations for investigating measurement properties of pressure ulcer/injury classification. • COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) [45] • • COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) [45] thermography to detect warm areas indicative of tissue inflammation and cold areas indicative of tissue death [73,74].…”

Section: What Next?mentioning

confidence: 99%