Devices measuring transepidermal water loss of the skin: a systematic review protocol of measurement properties. Issue 10 (7th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Klotz, Tanja; Maddern, Guy; Caplash, Yugesh; Wagstaff, Marcus
• Is Part Of: JBI evidence synthesis. Volume 19:Issue 10(2021:Oct.)
• Page Start: 2893
• Page End: 2903
• Publication Date: 2021-10-07
• Subjects: device -- instrumentation -- skin -- transepidermal water loss (TEWL) -- water loss (insensible); Evidence-Based Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodical; Evidence-based medicine; Periodicals; 610
• DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00468
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2689-8381

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Objective: The objective of this review is to examine the reliability and measurement error of devices that measure transepidermal water loss. Introduction: Transepidermal water loss is a physiological property of skin that increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilized measure of skin barrier integrity. Devices measuring transepidermal water loss are available as open, semi-open, or closed chamber. Studies that examine the similarities and differences between transepidermal water loss measurement devices are available. However, there has not been a systematic review to comprehensively collate and critique these studies. The aim of this review will be to synthesize the data from these studies to aid in selection and use of transepidermal water loss measurement devices in clinical practice or research. Inclusion criteria: Studies examining the reliability and/or measurement error of transepidermal water loss measurement devices will be included. Studies that examine a single device to demonstrate how different handling affects measurements will also be included. Studies that only report on measurement of transepidermal water loss outcomes without examination of reliability and/or measurement error will be excluded. Methods: The search strategy will aim to locate published and unpublished studies. Databases to be searched will include PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science, utilizing identified keywords and limited to studies in English. Gray literature sources will be searched to identify any unpublished documents. Study selection will adhere to the inclusion criteria and then be assessed by two reviewers for methodological quality utilizing COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) guidelines and risk of bias tools. Extracted data will be presented in a narrative synthesis and as tables and figures to aid data presentation.