Reducing Friction on Skin at Risk: The Use of 3M^™Cavilon^™No Sting Barrier Film

Abstract

Objective: To compare the coefficient of friction (CoF) of skin against fabric when the skin is covered with a liquid barrier film versus a silicone dressing, relative to a bare skin baseline.Approach: A laboratory instrument allowing the measurement of friction between two surfaces was used to compare the CoF between a fabric representing bed linen (100% cotton) and the skin of two laboratory operators, either bare (dry or hydrated) or covered with a liquid barrier film or a silicone dressing.Results: The CoF of hydrated skin was over twice the value found for dry skin. The liquid barrier film product reduced the CoF of hydrated skin to a greater extent than the silicone dressing.Innovation and Conclusion: Silicone dressings have recently been promoted to help prevent pressure ulcers. Published data have shown that their CoF is lower than other dressings, but the data were not compared to bare skin. We found that a liquid barrier film provided a greater reduction in the CoF of skin against linen than a silicone dressing. In the context of preventative use (e.g., application on intact skin) to reduce the risk of pressure ulcers, applying a liquid barrier film may reduce friction better than a silicone dressing.

Prevalence and associated factors of medical adhesive-related skin injury in cardiac critical care units

“…Barrier film provides a protective interface between skin and adhesive and helps reducing the friction coefficient; there is no need to remove this product, which may be reapplied as necessary. Clinical studies show that barrier films have the capacity of reducing erythema and skin flaking after removal of the adhesive material; its use in people at risk of developing cutaneous injury is therefore essential (2,(24)(25)(26) .…”

A randomized clinical trial of topical treatments for mild and severe udder cleft dermatitis in Dutch dairy cows

“…The fore udder attachment of cows becomes looser with increasing age, which could lead to moving of the udder skin across the UCD lesion, so called friction. It has been shown that friction impedes the process of wound healing (Bernatchez et al, 2015).…”

Friction characteristics of preventative wound dressings under clinically‐relevant conditions

“…The results both corroborate and conflict with the results of the studies of dressing frictional and shear properties which used different interface materials and loading values. Call et al 3 and Bernatchez et al 13 based their testing on a surface drag standard 14 . Call et al used a ground steel contact material and a nondisclosed force on the dressings while Bernatchez et al used a fabric interface and loading over a 4‐25 N range.…”

“…The results both corroborate and conflict with the results of the studies of dressing frictional and shear properties which used different interface materials and loading values. Call et al 3 and Bernatchez et al 13 based their testing on a surface drag standard. 14 One hypothesis is that dressings alter the induced shear forces on the skin that contribute to a beneficial effect.…”